About the z-multiplier in total error calculations

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 46, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 1648-1649

  Stöckl, Dietmar ^a   Thienpont, Linda M ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

One sided 95 probability; Ratio between systematic and random error; Two sided 95 probability

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC METHOD; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL CHEMISTRY; CLINICAL LABORATORY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RANDOM ERROR; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

ALGORITHMS; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CLINICAL CHEMISTRY TESTS; PROBABILITY; SOFTWARE; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS;

EID: 56549100095     PISSN: 14346621     EISSN: 14374331     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2008.309     Document Type: Article

References (3)

1. McFarren EF, Lishka RJ, Parker JH. Criterion for judging acceptability of analytical methods. Anal Chem 1970;42:358-65.
2. Westgard JO, Carey RN, Wold S. Criteria for judging precision and accuracy in method development and evaluation. Clin Chem 1974;20:825-33.
3. Biological variation database, and quality specifications for imprecision, bias and total error. The 2008 update. http://www.westgard.com/ guest36.htm. Accessed July 2, 2008.