Author:
Haeckel Rainer,Wosniok Werner,Arzideh Farhad,Zierk Jakob,Gurr Eberhard,Streichert Thomas
Abstract
AbstractIn a recent EFLM recommendation on reference intervals by Henny et al., the direct approach for determining reference intervals was proposed as the only presently accepted “gold” standard. Some essential drawbacks of the direct approach were not sufficiently emphasized, such as unacceptably wide confidence limits due to the limited number of observations claimed and the practical usability for only a limited age range. Indirect procedures avoid these disadvantages of the direct approach. Furthermore, indirect approaches are well suited for reference limits with large variations during lifetime and for common reference limits.
Subject
Biochemistry, medical,Clinical Biochemistry,General Medicine
Reference60 articles.
1. Prostate-specific antigen: significance for the diagnosis of prostate cancer in geriatric patients;J Lab Med,2007
2. Recommendation for the review of biological reference intervals in medical laboratories;Clin Chem Lab Med,2016
3. The normal range – a common misuse;J Chronic Dis,1967
4. A simple method of resolution of a distribution into Gaussian components;Biometrics,1967
Cited by
31 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献