Uncertainty in measurement and total error: different roads to the same quality destination?

Farrance, I, Badrick, T and Frenkel, R 2018, 'Uncertainty in measurement and total error: different roads to the same quality destination?', Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 1-5.


Document type: Journal Article
Collection: Journal Articles

Title Uncertainty in measurement and total error: different roads to the same quality destination?
Author(s) Farrance, I
Badrick, T
Frenkel, R
Year 2018
Journal name Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
Volume number 56
Issue number 12
Start page 1
End page 5
Total pages 5
Publisher Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Abstract Abstract: The debate comparing the benefits of measurement uncertainty (uncertainty in measurement, MU) with total error (TE) for the assessment of laboratory performance continues. The summary recently provided in this journal by members of the Task and Finish Group on Total Error (TFG-TE) of the EFLM put the arguments into clear perspective. Even though there is generally strong support for TE in many laboratories, some of the arguments proposed for its on-going support require further comment. In a recent opinion which focused directly on the TFGTE summary, several potentially confusing statements regarding ISO15189 and the Evaluation of measurement data - Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM) were again promulgated to promote TE methods for assessing uncertainty in laboratory measurement. In this opinion, we present an alternative view of the key issues and outline our views with regard to the relationship between ISO15189, uncertainty in measurement and the GUM.
Subject Biological Mathematics
Clinical Chemistry (diagnostics)
Applied Statistics
Keyword(s) bias
estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)
ISO15189
measurement uncertainty
total error
uncertainty in measurement
DOI - identifier 10.1515/cclm-2018-0421
Copyright notice © 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.
ISSN 1437-4331
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 2 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Altmetric details:
Access Statistics: 8 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 13:04:00 EST by Catalyst Administrator
© 2014 RMIT Research Repository • Powered by Fez SoftwareContact us