Bias in clinical chemistry

Bioanalysis

Volumn 6, Issue 21, 2014, Pages 2855-2875

  Theodorsson, Elvar ^a   Magnusson, Bertil ^b   Leito, Ivo ^c  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b SP TECHNICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF SWEDEN   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TARTU   (Estonia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; CALCULATION; CALIBRATION; CLINICAL CHEMISTRY; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEASUREMENT; MEASUREMENT ERROR; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; AUTOMATION; HUMAN; LABORATORY; STANDARDS; UNCERTAINTY;

AUTOMATION; CLINICAL CHEMISTRY TESTS; HUMANS; LABORATORIES; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84918569474     PISSN: 17576180     EISSN: 17576199     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4155/bio.14.249     Document Type: Review

References (100)

1. Mcnaught AD, Wilkinson A. International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry: Compendium of chemical terminology: IUPAC recommendations. (2nd Edition). Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK (1997).
2. EP09-A3 Measurement Procedure Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline (3rd Edition). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, PA, USA (2013).
3. Kallner A, Khorovskaya L, Pettersson T. A method to estimate the uncertainty of measurements in a conglomerate of instruments/laboratories. Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest. 65(7), 551-558 (2005).
4. JCGM. Evaluation of measurement data-guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (2008). www.bipm.org/utils/common/documents/jcgm/JCGM-100-2008-E.pdf.
5. Westgard JO, Carey RN, Wold S. Criteria for judging precision and accuracy in method development and evaluation. Clin. Chem. 20(7), 825-833 (1974).
6. Richtlinie der Bundesärztekammer zur Qualitätssicherung laboratoriumsmedizinischer Untersuchungen. Bundesärztekammer, Berlin, Germany (2013).
7. Barwick V, Prichard E. Terminology in Analytical Measurement-Introduction to VIM 3. (2011). www.eurachem.org
8. rd Edition). (2012). www.bipm.org/utils/common/documents/jcgm/JCGM-200-2012.pdf
9. Recommendations for clinical laboratory improvement amendments of 1988 (CLIA) waiver applications for manufacturers of in vitro diagnostic devices. US Food and Drug Administration, MD, USA (2008).
10. Greenberg N. Update on current concepts and meanings in laboratory medicine-Standardization, traceability and harmonization. Clin. Chim. Acta 432, 49-54 (2014).
11. Menditto A, Patriarca M, Magnusson B. Understanding the meaning of accuracy, trueness and precision. Accred. Qual. Assur. 12, 45-47 (2007).
12. Thompson M. Towards a unifed model of errors in analytical measurement. Analyst 125, 2020-2025 (2000).
13. Iso 17511:2003 In vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices-Measurement Of Quantities In Biological Samples-Metrological Traceability Of Values Assigned To Calibrators And Control Materials. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland (2003).
14. Armbruster D, Miller RR. JCTLM: A global approach to promote the standardisation of clinical laboratory test results. Clin. Biochem. Rev. 28(3), 105-113 (2007).
15. EU. Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. (1998). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=CELEX:31998L0079:EN:NOT.
16. Panteghini M. Traceability as a unique tool to improve standardization in laboratory medicine. Clin. Biochem. 42(4-5), 236-240 (2009).
17. Infusino I, Frusciante E, Ferrero CA, Panteghini M. Commutability of two JCTLM-listed secondary reference materials for two commercial lithium assays. Clin. Chim. Acta 414, 152-153 (2012).
18. Siekmann L. Establishing measurement traceability in clinical chemistry Accred. Qual. Assur. 9(1-2), 5-17 (2004).
19. Siekmann L. Implementation of the concept of traceability in laboratory medicine in external quality assessment. Clin. Biochem. 42(4-5), 293-294 (2009).
20. Siekmann L. Metrological traceability-a concept for standardization in laboratory medicine. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 51(5), 953-957 (2013).
21. Panteghini M. Application of traceability concepts to analytical quality control may reconcile total error with uncertainty of measurement. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 48(1), 7-10 (2010).
22. Tate JR, Johnson R, Barth J, Panteghini M. Harmonization of laboratory testing-Current achievements and future strategies. Clin. Chim. Acta 432, 4-7 (2013).
23. Müller MM. Tracebility in laboratory medicine. Accred. Qual. Assur. 8, 340-345 (2003).
24. Miller WG, Myers GL, Lou Gantzer M et al. Roadmap for harmonization of clinical laboratory measurement procedures. Clin. Chem. 57(8), 1108-1117 (2011).
25. Miller WG, Tate JR, Barth JH, Jones GR. Harmonization: The Sample, the Measurement, and the Report. Ann. Lab. Med. 34(3), 187-197 (2014).
26. Weykamp C, Eckfeldt J, Vesper H et al. Toolbox of technical procedures to be considered when developing a process to achieve harmonization for a measurand. (2013). www.harmonization.net/Resource/Documents/Tool-Box-2013.pdf
27. Bonini P, Plebani M, Ceriotti F, Rubboli F. Errors in laboratory medicine. Clin. Chem. 48(5), 691-698 (2002).
28. Misra S, Barth JH. How good is the evidence base for test selection in clinical guidelines? Clin. Chim. Acta 432, 27-32 (2014).
29. Simundic AM, Cornes M, Grankvist K et al. Survey of national guidelines, education and training on phlebotomy in 28 European countries: An original report by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) working group for the preanalytical phase (WG-PA). Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 51(8), 1585-1593 (2013).
30. Aakre KM, Langlois MR, Watine J et al. Critical review of laboratory investigations in clinical practice guidelines: Proposals for the description of investigation. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 51(6), 1217-1226 (2013).
31. Collinson PO, Van Dieijen-Visser MP, Pulkki K et al. Evidence-based laboratory medicine: how well do laboratories follow recommendations and guidelines? The Cardiac Marker Guideline Uptake in Europe (CARMAGUE) study. Clin. Chem. 58(1), 305-306 (2012).
32. Plebani M. Harmonization in laboratory medicine: the complete picture. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 51(4), 741-751 (2013).
33. Alvarez-Prieto M, Jiménez-Chacón J, Montero-Curbelo Á. Do we need to consider metrological meanings of different measurement uncertainty estimations? Accred. Qual. Assur. 14, 623-634 (2009).
34. Thienpont LM. Accuracy in clinical chemistry-Who will kiss Sleeping Beauty awake? Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 46(9), 1220-1222 (2008).
35. Rao CR, Kleffe J. Estimation of Variance Components and Applications. Elsevier Science Publications, Amsterdam, Netherlands (1988).
36. Cox DR, Solomon PJ. Components of Variance. CRC Press Inc., FL, USA (2003).
37. Searle SR, Casella G, Mccullogh CE. Variance Components. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., NY, USA (1992).
38. Galen RS, Gambino SR. Beyond Normality: The Predictive Value and Effciency of Medical Diagnoses. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., NY, USA (1975).
39. Knottnerus JA, Buntinx F. The Evidence Base of Clinical Diagnosis: Theory and Methods of Diagnostic Research (2nd Edition). Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK (2008).
40. Krzanowski WJ, Hand DJ. ROC Curves for Continuous Data. CRC Press Inc., FL, USA (2009).
41. Ricós C, Alvarez V, Cava F et al. Current databases on biological variation: pros, cons and progress. Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest. 59(7), 491-500 (1999).
42. Fraser CG. Interpretation of Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Data. Blackwell Scientifc, Oxford, UK (1986).
43. Ricos C, Alvarez V, Cava F et al. desirable specifcations for total error, imprecision, and bias, derived from intra-and inter-individual biologic variation. (2014) www.westgard.com/biodatabase1.htm.
44. Petersen PH, Jorgensen LG, Brandslund I, De Fine Olivarius N, Stahl M. Consequences of bias and imprecision in measurements of glucose and hba1c for the diagnosis and prognosis of diabetes mellitus. Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest. Suppl. 240, 51-60 (2005).
45. Petersen PH, de Verdier CH, Groth T, Fraser CG, Blaabjerg O, Horder M. The infuence of analytical bias on diagnostic misclassifcations. Clin. Chim. Acta 260(2), 189-206 (1997).
46. Theodorsson E. Validation and verifcation of measurement methods in clinical chemistry. Bioanalysis 4(3), 305-320 (2012).
47. Kateman G, Buydens L. Quality Control in Analytical Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons, NY, USA (1993).
48. Montgomery DC. Introduction to statistical quality control (6th Edition). Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA (2009).
49. nd Edition). RSC Publishing, Cambridge, UK (2009).
50. Becker D, Christensen R, Currie L et al. Use of NIST standard reference materials for decisions on performance of analytical chemical methods and laboratories. (1992). www.nist.gov/mml/csd/inorganic/upload/NIST- SpecialPub829.pdf
51. Natrella MG. Experimental Statistics. John Wiley & Sons, NY, USA (1984).
52. Kallner A. Laboratory Statistics: Handbook of Formulas and Terms (1st Edition). Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands (2013)
53. Castrup H. Estimating bias uncertainty. (2001). www. isgmax.com/articles-papers/bias%20uncertainty.pdf
54. Devenathan S, Rollins DK, Vardeman SB. A new approach for improved identifcation of measurement bias. Comput. Chem. Eng. 24, 2755-2764 (2000).
55. Magnusson B, Ellison SL. Treatment of uncorrected measurement bias in uncertainty estimation for chemical measurements. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 390(1), 201-213 (2008).
56. Magnusson B, Leito I. Personal communication, draft leafet from EuraChem. Measurement uncertainty and traceability working group. www.eurachem.org. (2014).
57. Dietzen DJ, Queen SF, Solomon SS. Matrix-dependent bias in total thyroxine measurement on the Beckman Access. Clin. Chim. Acta 316(1-2), 171-174 (2002).
58. Sobas F, Benattar N, Bellisario A et al. Impact of quality control matrix effect: Application to the calculation of uncertainty of measurement in one-stage clotting factor VIII assay. Blood Coagul. Fibrinolysis 21(5), 498-501 (2010).
59. Unsal I, Coskun A, Serteser M, Inal TC, Ozpinar A. Toward standardization of quality assessment in laboratory medicine by using the same matrix samples for both internal and external quality assessments. Accred. Qua l. Assur. 15, 621-627 (2010).
60. Zegers I, Beetham R, Keller T et al. The importance of commutability of reference materials used as calibrators: the example of ceruloplasmin. Clin. Chem. 59(9), 1322-1329 (2013).
61. Miller WG, Myers GL. Commutability still matters. Clin. Chem. 59(9), 1291-1293 (2013).
62. White GH. Metrological traceability in clinical biochemistry Ann. Clin. Biochem. 48(Pt 5), 393-409 (2011).
63. Vesper HW, Miller WG, Myers GL. Reference materials and commutability. Clin. Biochem. Rev. 28(4), 139-147 (2007).
64. Miller WG, Myers GL, Rej R. Why commutability matters. Clin. Chem. 52(4), 553-554 (2006).
65. Franzini C, Ceriotti F. Impact of reference materials on accuracy in clinical chemistry. Clin. Biochem. 31(6), 449-457 (1998).
66. Franzini C. Commutability of reference materials in clinical chemistry. J. Int. Fed. Clin. Chem. 5(4), 169-173 (1993).
67. Vesper HW, Thienpont LM. Traceability in laboratory medicine. Clin. Chem. 55(6), 1067-1075 (2009).
68. Thienpont LM, Van Nuwenborg JE, Stockl D. Intrinsic and routine quality of serum total potassium measurement as investigated by split-sample measurement with an ion chromatography candidate reference method. Clin. Chem. 44(4), 849-857 (1998).
69. Solvik UO, Stavelin A, Christensen NG, Sandberg S. External quality assessment of prothrombin time: the split-sample model compared with external quality assessment with commercial control material. Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest. 66(4), 337-349 (2006).
70. Stavelin A, Petersen PH, Solvik UO, Sandberg S. External quality assessment of point-of-care methods: model for combined assessment of method bias and single-participant performance by the use of native patient samples and noncommutable control materials. Clin. Chem. 59(2), 363-371 (2013).
71. Dybkaer R. From total allowable error via metrological traceability to uncertainty of measurement of the unbiased result. Accred. Qua l. Ass ur. 4(9-10), 401-405 (1999).
72. Kuttatharmmakul S, Massart DL, Smeyers-Verbeke J. Comparison of alternative measurement methods: Determination of the minimal number of measurements required for the evaluation of the bias by means of interval hypothesis testing. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. 52(1), 61-73 (2000).
73. Levey S, Jennings ER. The use of control charts in the clinical laboratory. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 20, 1059-1066 (1950).
74. Henry RJ, Seaglove M. The running of standards in clinical chemistry and the use of the control chart. J. Clin. Pathol. 5, 305-311 (1952).
75. Maroto A, Riu J, Boque R, Rius FX. Estimating uncertainties of analytical results using information from the validation process. Anal. Chim. Acta 391(2), 173-185 (1999).
76. Committee AM. Uncertainty of measurement: Implications of its use in analytical science. Analyst 120, 2303-2305 (1995).
77. Barwick VJ, Ellison SLR. Estimating measurement uncertainty using a cause and effect and reconciliation approach Part 2. Measurement uncertainty estimates compared with collaborative trial expectation. Anal. Commun. 35(11), 377-383 (1998).
78. Ellison SL. ISO uncertainty and collaborative trial data. Accred. Qual. Assur. 3, 95-100 (1998).
79. Ellison SLR, Barwick VJ. Estimating measurement uncertainty: Reconciliation using a cause and effect approach. Accred. Qual. Assur. 3 (3), 101-105 (1998).
80. Barwick VJ, Ellison SL, Rafferty MJQ, Gill RS. The evaluation of measurement uncertainty from method validation studies Part 2: The practical application of a laboratory protocol. Accred. Qual. Assur. 5, 104-113 (2000).
81. Ellison SLR, Williams A. Eurachem/CITAC Guide Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement (3rd Edition). (2012). www.eurachem.org/index.php/publications/guides/quam
82. ÓDonnell GE, Hibbert DB. Reply to "comment": Do we really need to account for run bias when producing analytical results with stated uncertainty? Analyst 132(12), 1272-1274 (2005).
83. O'donnell GE, Hibbert DB. Treatment of bias in estimating measurement uncertainty. Analyst 130(5), 721-729 (2005).
84. Hibbert DB. Systematic errors in analytical measurement results. J. Chromatogr. A 1158(1-2), 25-32 (2007).
85. Kadis R. Do we really need to account for run bias when producing analytical results with stated uncertainty? Comment on 'Treatment of bias in estimating measurement uncertainty' by G. E. O'Donnell and D. B. Hibbert. Analyst 132(12), 1272-1274; discussion 1275-1277 (2007).
86. Synek V. Attempts to include uncorrected bias in the measurement uncertainty. Talanta 65(4), 829-837 (2005).
87. Phillips SD, Eberhardt KR. Guidelines for expressing the uncertainty of measurement results containing uncorrected bias. J. Res. Natl Inst. Stand. Technol. 102(5), 577-585 (1997).
88. Hasselbarth W. Accounting for bias in measurement uncertainty estimation. Accred. Qual. Assur. 9, 509-514 (2004).
89. Hässelbarth W. Measurement uncertainty procedures revisited: Direct determination of uncertainty and bias handling. Accred. Qual. Assur. 3, 418-422 (1998).
90. Rozet E, Marini RD, Ziemons E et al. Total error and uncertainty: Friends or foes? Trends Anal. Chem. 30(5), 797-806 (2011).
91. Westgard JO, Westgard SA. Total analytic error. From concept to application. (2013)www.aacc.org/publications/cln/2013/september/Pages/Total-Analytic-Error.aspx#
92. Westgard JO. The meaning and application of total error. (2007). www.westgard.com/essay111.htm?format=phocapdf
93. Krouwer JS. Multi-factor designs IV. How multi-factor designs improve the estimate of total error by accounting for protocol-specifc biases. Clin. Chem. 37, 26-29 (1991).
94. Krouwer JS. Estimating total analytical error and its sources. Techniques to improve method evaluation. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 116(7), 726-731 (1992).
95. Krouwer JS. How to improve total error modeling by accounting for error sources beyond imprecision and bias. Accred. Qual. Assur. 47(7), 1329-1330 (2001).
96. Krouwer JS. Setting performance goals and evaluating total analytical error for diagnostic assays. Clin. Chem. 48(6 Pt 1), 919-927 (2002).
97. Krouwer JS. Simulating total error while excluding results underestimates total error. Clin. Chem. 56 (9), 1505-1506; author reply 1506 (2010).
98. Krouwer JS, Astles JR, Cooper WG et al. Estimation of Total Analytical Error for Clinical Laboratory Methods; Approved Guideline, EP21-A. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, PA, USA (2003).
99. Bauersfeld W. RiliBAK-a new computation concept. Clin. Lab. 52(11-12), 689-694 (2006).
100. Phillipov G, Phillips PJ. Components of total measurement error for hemoglobin A(1c) determination. Clin. Chem. 47(10), 1851-1853 (2001).