HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit an electronic Letter to the Editor about this paper Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (45) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Petersen, P. H. Articles by Kjeldsen, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Petersen, P. H. Articles by Kjeldsen, J. Related Collections Laboratory Management

Graphical interpretation of analytical data from comparison of a field method with a Reference Method by use of difference plots

¹ Department of Clinical Chemistry, Vejle Sygehus, DK-7100 Vejle, Denmark.
^a Author for correspondence. Fax + 45 65 41 19 11; e-mail phy{at}imbmed ou.dk.

Various viewpoints have been offered regarding the appropriate use of scatter plots or difference plots (bias plots or residual plots) in comparing analytical methods. In many of these discussions it seems the basic concepts of identity (within inherent imprecision) and acceptability based on analytical goals (analytical quality specifications) have been forgotten. With the increasing number of Reference Methods in laboratory medicine, these basic concepts are becoming more important in validation of field methods. Here we describe a simple and effective graphical test of these hypotheses (identity and acceptability) by use of difference plots. These plots display the underlying hypothesis before the measured differences are plotted and allow interpretation of the results according to specific criteria. We further describe simple but effective interpretations of the data, when the hypothesis is not fulfilled, by using two data sets drawn from comparisons of field methods for S-creatinine with a Reference Method for this analyte. The difference plot is a graphical tool with related simple statistics for comparison of a field method with a Reference Method, focusing on (a) identity within the inherent analytical imprecision or (b) acceptability within analytical quality specifications. Calculation of the standard deviation of the differences is an indispensable tool for evaluation of aberrant-sample bias (matrix effects).

The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:

				W S Waring, L E Evans, and C T Kirkpatrick Glycolysis inhibitors negatively bias blood glucose measurements: potential impact on the reported prevalence of diabetes mellitus J. Clin. Pathol., July 1, 2007; 60(7): 820 - 923. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Olsson, H. Vanderstichele, N. Andreasen, G. De Meyer, A. Wallin, B. Holmberg, L. Rosengren, E. Vanmechelen, and K. Blennow Simultaneous Measurement of {beta}-Amyloid(1-42), Total Tau, and Phosphorylated Tau (Thr181) in Cerebrospinal Fluid by the xMAP Technology Clin. Chem., February 1, 2005; 51(2): 336 - 345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. S. Krouwer Setting Performance Goals and Evaluating Total Analytical Error for Diagnostic Assays Clin. Chem., June 1, 2002; 48(6): 919 - 927. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Dewitte, C. Fierens, D. Stockl, and L. M. Thienpont Application of the Bland-Altman Plot for Interpretation of Method-Comparison Studies: A Critical Investigation of Its Practice Clin. Chem., May 1, 2002; 48(5): 799 - 801. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. G. Altman and J. M. Bland Commentary on Quantifying Agreement between Two Methods of Measurement Clin. Chem., May 1, 2002; 48(5): 801 - 802. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Ohashi, M. Yamaki, C. S. Pandav, M. G. Karmarkar, and M. Irie Simple Microplate Method for Determination of Urinary Iodine Clin. Chem., April 1, 2000; 46(4): 529 - 536. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. H. Flowers and J. D. Cook Dried Plasma Spot Measurements of Ferritin and Transferrin Receptor for Assessing Iron Status Clin. Chem., October 1, 1999; 45(10): 1826 - 1832. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Linnet Necessary Sample Size for Method Comparison Studies Based on Regression Analysis Clin. Chem., June 1, 1999; 45(6): 882 - 894. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Q. Wei, V. P. Chu, A. R. Craig, J. E. Duffy, D. M. Obzansky, D. Kilgore, I. S. Masulli, C. M. Sanders, and J. C. Thompson Automated Homogeneous Immunoassay for Gentamicin on the Dimension Clinical Chemistry System Clin. Chem., March 1, 1999; 45(3): 388 - 393. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Linnet Limitations of the Paired t-Test for Evaluation of Method Comparison Data Clin. Chem., February 1, 1999; 45(2): 314 - 315. [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Millard, E. Degrave, M. Philippe, and J.-L. Gala Detection of intracellular antigens by flow cytometry: comparison of two chemical methods and microwave heating Clin. Chem., November 1, 1998; 44(11): 2320 - 2330. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Stockl, K. Dewitte, and L. M. Thienpont Validity of linear regression in method comparison studies: is it limited by the statistical model or the quality of the analytical input data? Clin. Chem., November 1, 1998; 44(11): 2340 - 2346. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Andersen, P. H. Petersen, O. Blaabjerg, J. Hangaard, and C. Hagen Evaluation of growth hormone assays using ratio plots Clin. Chem., May 1, 1998; 44(5): 1032 - 1038. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. M. Thienpont, J. E. Van Nuwenborg, and D. Stockl Intrinsic and routine quality of serum total potassium measurement as investigated by split-sample measurement with an ion chromatography candidate reference method Clin. Chem., April 1, 1998; 44(4): 849 - 857. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]