Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 43: 2149-2154, 1997;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parvin, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Gronowski, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Parvin, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Gronowski, A. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Laboratory Management
(Clinical Chemistry. 1997;43:2149-2154.)
© 1997 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.

Articles

Effect of analytical run length on quality-control (QC) performance and the QC planning process

Curtis A. Parvina and Ann M. Gronowski

a Author for correspondence. Fax 314-362-3016; e-mail parvin{at}wugcrc.wustl.edu

The performance measure traditionally used in the quality-control (QC) planning process is the probability of rejecting an analytical run when an out-of-control error condition exists. A shortcoming of this performance measure is that it doesn't allow comparison of QC strategies that define analytical runs differently. Accommodating different analytical run definitions is straightforward if QC performance is measured in terms of the average number of patient samples to error detection, or the average number of patient samples containing an analytical error that exceeds total allowable error. By using these performance measures to investigate the impact of different analytical run definitions on QC performance demonstrates that during routine QC monitoring, the length of the interval between QC tests can have a major influence on the expected number of unacceptable results produced during the existence of an out-of-control error condition.




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


Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
C. A. Parvin and S. Robbins III
Evaluation of the Performance of Randomized versus Fixed Time Schedules for Quality Control Procedures
Clin. Chem., April 1, 2007; 53(4): 575 - 580.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
J. Dechert and K. E. Case
Multivariate approach to quality control in clinical chemistry
Clin. Chem., September 1, 1998; 44(9): 1959 - 1963.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
S. P. Caudill, G. R. Cooper, S. J. Smith, and G. L. Myers
Assessment of current National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines for total cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL-cholesterol, and LDL-cholesterol measurements
Clin. Chem., August 1, 1998; 44(8): 1650 - 1658.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.