Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 51: 450-452, 2005. First published December 8, 2004; 10.1373/clinchem.2004.039354
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
clinchem.2004.039354v1
51/2/450    most recent
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 (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lacher, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, M. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lacher, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, M. D.
Related Collections
Right arrow Laboratory Management
Right arrow General Clinical Chemistry
Right arrow Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine and Test Utilization
(Clinical Chemistry. 2005;51:450-452.)
© 2005 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.


Technical Briefs

Estimate of Biological Variation of Laboratory Analytes Based on the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

David A. Lachera, Jeffery P. Hughes and Margaret D. Carroll

Division of Health and Nutritional Examination Surveys, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD;

aaddress correspondence to this author at: National Center for Health Statistics, 3311 Toledo Rd, Room 4215, Hyattsville, MD 20782; fax 301-458-4028, e-mail dol2{at}cdc.gov

Laboratory analytes for individuals are subject to several sources of variation, including biological variation, preanalytical variation (specimen collection), analytical variation (bias and imprecision), and postanalytical variation (reporting of results). Biological variation consists of within-person (WP) and between-person (BP) variation. These components of biological variation are used to set analytical quality specifications for bias and imprecision, evaluate serial changes in individual analytes, and assess the clinical utility of population-based reference intervals.

Desirable quality specifications for imprecision (I), bias (B), and total error have been related to the WP CV (CVw) and the BP CV (CVg) of laboratory analytes (1)(2)(3). Imprecision should be ideally less than one half of the CVW, and bias should be <0.25[(CVw)2 + (CVg)2]1/2. The quality specification for total error is to be less than kI + B, where k = 1.65 at {alpha} = 0.05. The total CV (CVt) can be estimated assuming that the CVs of all sources are measured at the same analyte mean and that pre- and postanalytical sources of variation are negligible. The CVt = [(CVa)2 + (CVw)2]1/2, where the analytical CV (CVa) equals the laboratory method imprecision (CVi) if there is no bias present.

Estimates of CVw and CVg for laboratory analytes were derived from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) conducted from 1988 to 1994 (4)(5). NHANES III was a cross-sectional survey that collected data on the civilian noninstitutionalized US population through questionnaires and medical examinations, including laboratory analytes. NHANES III used a stratified, multistage probability design to collect a nationally representative sample. The laboratory methods including imprecision (CVi) for NHANES III have been described (6).

The BP and WP means, SDs, and CVs for 42 general biochemical, nutritional, immunologic, environmental, and hematologic analytes are listed in Table 1 . The BP and WP variations were estimated on 24 978 and 2426 sample persons, respectively. The WP sample, ~10% of the sample persons, was recruited for a second analyte measurement. The WP sample was not selected randomly, but with the goal for obtaining approximately equal proportions of males and females with one half between 20 and 39 years of age and one half over 40 years of age. When possible, the second examinations were scheduled at the same time of day as the first examinations. Compared with the BP sample, the WP sample was older (mean age, 42.9 vs 30.8 years), had more non-Hispanic whites (42.2% vs 34.7%), and had fewer Mexican Americans (25.4% vs 30.6%). There was no statistically significant difference in gender proportions between the BP and WP samples.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. BP, WP, and method CV and index of individuality for laboratory analytes from NHANES III.

The CVg values were estimated using a weighted, complex sample design by Taylor series linearization (7). The BP standard deviation was calculated as (SE2 + SDsrs2)1/2, where SE is the standard error of the mean obtained with the complex design and SDsrs2 is the square of the standard deviation assuming a simple random sample. The WP variations were estimated from a nonrandom, unweighted sample with a mean (SD) of 17 (8) days between two analyte measurements. The CVw was calculated as [(CVt)2 – (CVa)2]1/2. The distributions of several analytes were nongaussian, and extreme outliers were excluded to obtain an approximately gaussian distribution with more stable estimates of variation. Outliers were eliminated by use of Tukey’s method, which defines outliers as three interquartile ranges below the 25th percentile or above the 75th percentile (8). Statistical analyses were carried out with SAS for Windows software (SAS Institute) and SUDAAN software (Research Triangle Institute).

The CVw and CVg exceeded the CVi for laboratory analytes (Table 1Up ). For most laboratory analytes, the mean BP and WP analyte values were similar despite some demographic differences between the two groups. The analytical quality specifications for imprecision and bias can be judged by use of the CVw and CVg. For example, the total cholesterol imprecision should be less than one half of CVw (8.2%), or 4.1%. The method imprecision was 2.3%. The bias for total cholesterol should be <0.25[(CVw)2 + (CVg)2]1/2, or 0.25[(0.079)2 + (0.226)2]1/2, or ~6.0%. The quality specification for total error is estimated as B + 1.65(I), or 6.0% + 1.65(4.1%), or 12.8%. This compares with the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) performance criteria of <3% for imprecision and bias and 9% for total error (9).

Serum sodium had the lowest CVg (1.6%) and lowest CVw (1.3%). This reflects the narrow homeostatic range for sodium that the body maintains. High CVw and CVg values were seen for several analytes. High CV values could result from natural population or individual variations, diurnal variations, disease, outlying analyte values, and relatively lower analyte values.

The ratio of CVw to CVg, also known as the index of individuality, is important in determining the use of population-based reference (normal) intervals in detecting changes of disease status in individuals (10)(11). When the index of individuality is low (<0.6), the individual results stay within a narrow range compared with the population reference interval. Hence, a low index suggests the utility of evaluating serial changes in analyte values in an individual, and population-based reference intervals would be of limited use. A high index (>1.4) suggests that the reference interval is appropriate. The index of individuality ranged from 0.13 for serum alkaline phosphatase to 0.83 for serum bicarbonate (Table 1Up ).

In this study, BP and WP estimates of CV were obtained for some selective environmental and nutritional analytes. NHANES III provides a better estimate of CVg than do other short-term local studies because the NHANES III sample was nationally representative (1)(12)(13). The CVw estimate was limited by the nonrandom, self-selected design and reflected a mean of 17 days between two measurements. The estimate of CVw could be improved by use of a stratified, multistage probability design over different time periods. Differences for CVw and CVg among subpopulations (gender, age, race, and ethnicity) can be further investigated by use of NHANES III data.


References

  1. Ricos C, Alvarez V, Cava F, Garcia-Lario JV, Hernandez A, Jimenez CV, et al. Current databases on biological variation: pros, cons and progress. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999;59:491-500.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Fraser CG. Biological variation: from principles to practice 2001:151pp AACC Press Washington DC. .
  3. Fraser CG, Harris EK. Generation and application of data on biological variation in clinical chemistry. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 1989;27:409-437.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. . National Center for Health Statistics. Plan and operation of the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–94. Vital Health Stat 1994;1(32):415pp.
  5. . US Department of Health and Human Services. Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), 1988–94. NHANES III second examination file documentation. Series 11, No. 3A 1999 National Center for Health Statistics Hyattsville, MD. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nhanes/nh3data.htm#NHANES%20III%20Series%2011,%20No.%203a (accessed September 2004)..
  6. National Center for Health Statistics. Laboratory procedures used for the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), 1988–94. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes3/cdrom/nchs/manuals/labman.pdf (accessed September 2004)..
  7. Wolter KM. Introduction to variance estimation 1985:221-247 Springer-Verlag New York. .
  8. Tukey JW. Exploratory data analysis 1977:44 Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Reading, MA. .
  9. Current status of blood cholesterol measurement in clinical laboratories in the United States: a report from the laboratory standardization panel of the National Cholesterol Education Program. Clin Chem 1988;34:193-201.[Free Full Text]
  10. Fraser CG. Inherent biological variation and reference values. Clin Chem Lab Med 2004;42:758-764.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Harris EK. Effects of intra- and interindividual variation on the appropriate use of normal intervals. Clin Chem 1974;20:1535-1542.[Abstract]
  12. Fraser CG. Biological variation in clinical chemistry, an update: collated data, 1988–1991. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1992;116:916-923.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Ricos C, Garcia-Lario JV, Alvarez V, Caval F, Domenech M, Hernandez A, et al. Biological variation database, and quality specifications for imprecision, bias and total error (desirable and minimum). The 2004 update. http://www.westgard.com/guest26.htm (accessed September 2004)..



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


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
J. Arnaud, J.-P. Weber, C. W. Weykamp, P. J. Parsons, J. Angerer, E. Mairiaux, O. Mazarrasa, S. Valkonen, A. Menditto, M. Patriarca, et al.
Quality Specifications for the Determination of Copper, Zinc, and Selenium in Human Serum or Plasma: Evaluation of an Approach Based on Biological and Analytical Variation
Clin. Chem., November 1, 2008; 54(11): 1892 - 1899.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
B. S. Drammeh, R. L. Schleicher, C. M. Pfeiffer, R. B. Jain, M. Zhang, and P. H. Nguyen
Effects of Delayed Sample Processing and Freezing on Serum Concentrations of Selected Nutritional Indicators
Clin. Chem., November 1, 2008; 54(11): 1883 - 1891.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
IOVSHome page
L. L. Huang, H. R. Coleman, J. Kim, F. de Monasterio, W. T. Wong, R. L. Schleicher, F. L. Ferris III, and E. Y. Chew
Oral Supplementation of Lutein/Zeaxanthin and Omega-3 Long Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in Persons Aged 60 Years or Older, with or without AMD
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., September 1, 2008; 49(9): 3864 - 3869.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
C. D. Saudek, W. H. Herman, D. B. Sacks, R. M. Bergenstal, D. Edelman, and M. B. Davidson
A New Look at Screening and Diagnosing Diabetes Mellitus
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2008; 93(7): 2447 - 2453.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
A. K Kant and B. I Graubard
Ethnic and socioeconomic differences in variability in nutritional biomarkers
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, May 1, 2008; 87(5): 1464 - 1471.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Pathol.Home page
W S A Smellie
What is a significant difference between sequential laboratory results?Calf muscle pain can indicate localised vasculitis
J. Clin. Pathol., April 1, 2008; 61(4): 419 - 425.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Intern MedHome page
E. Selvin, C. M. Crainiceanu, F. L. Brancati, and J. Coresh
Short-term Variability in Measures of Glycemia and Implications for the Classification of Diabetes
Arch Intern Med, July 23, 2007; 167(14): 1545 - 1551.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
IOVSHome page
J. M. Rosenthal, J. Kim, F. de Monastario, D. J. S. Thompson, R. A. Bone, J. T. Landrum, F. F. de Moura, F. Khachik, H. Chen, R. L. Schleicher, et al.
Dose-Ranging Study of Lutein Supplementation in Persons Aged 60 Years or Older
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., December 1, 2006; 47(12): 5227 - 5233.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
D. K. Talwar, M. K. Azharuddin, C. Williamson, Y. P. Teoh, D. C. McMillan, and D. St. J. O'Reilly
Biological Variation of Vitamins in Blood of Healthy Individuals
Clin. Chem., November 1, 2005; 51(11): 2145 - 2150.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
clinchem.2004.039354v1
51/2/450    most recent
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 (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lacher, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, M. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lacher, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, M. D.
Related Collections
Right arrow Laboratory Management
Right arrow General Clinical Chemistry
Right arrow Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine and Test Utilization


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS