TY - JOUR
T1 - Uncertainties in measurement of uncertainty measurements
T2 - A commentary from the perspective of a specialist haemostasis laboratory
AU - Favaloro, Emmanuel J.
PY - 2006/5
Y1 - 2006/5
N2 - Determination of uncertainty of measurement (MU) for quantitative testing in clinical pathology laboratories is an accreditation requirement of the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA). Knowledge of an assay's MU carries various potential benefits for both the laboratory and the organisation. For the laboratory, these include a better understanding of assay limitations and improved comparison of results across laboratories (both local and international). There are currently a number of guidelines and publications available that aim to assist laboratories to establish MU for their quantitative assays. Despite these publications, or perhaps in part because of the existence of multiple publications, derivation of MU is not straightforward. Part of the problem relates to some potentially contradictory information among the publications. In addition, there have been questions raised regarding whether some of the guidelines may underestimate MU, or otherwise not fully comply with NATA (or ISO) requirements. Furthermore, there are specific test situations where some of the suggested approaches may not work as well as others, but this may not be recognised by some laboratories. The current commentary highlights some of the limitations and seemingly conflicting approaches recommended by various publications, from the perspective of a specialist haemostasis laboratory. Nevertheless, many of the examples depicted in this report will hold true for many other laboratory tests and pathology laboratories.
AB - Determination of uncertainty of measurement (MU) for quantitative testing in clinical pathology laboratories is an accreditation requirement of the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA). Knowledge of an assay's MU carries various potential benefits for both the laboratory and the organisation. For the laboratory, these include a better understanding of assay limitations and improved comparison of results across laboratories (both local and international). There are currently a number of guidelines and publications available that aim to assist laboratories to establish MU for their quantitative assays. Despite these publications, or perhaps in part because of the existence of multiple publications, derivation of MU is not straightforward. Part of the problem relates to some potentially contradictory information among the publications. In addition, there have been questions raised regarding whether some of the guidelines may underestimate MU, or otherwise not fully comply with NATA (or ISO) requirements. Furthermore, there are specific test situations where some of the suggested approaches may not work as well as others, but this may not be recognised by some laboratories. The current commentary highlights some of the limitations and seemingly conflicting approaches recommended by various publications, from the perspective of a specialist haemostasis laboratory. Nevertheless, many of the examples depicted in this report will hold true for many other laboratory tests and pathology laboratories.
KW - Bias
KW - Measurement of uncertainty
KW - Quantitative testing
KW - Random error
KW - Systematic error
KW - Total error
KW - Uncertainty of measurement
KW - Variation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33746138960&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33746138960&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:33746138960
SN - 1038-1643
VL - 27
SP - 72
EP - 83
JO - Australian Journal of Medical Science
JF - Australian Journal of Medical Science
IS - 2
ER -