Affiliation:
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine , Armed Forces Capital Hospital , Gyeonggi-do , Republic of Korea
2. Department of Laboratory Medicine , Chung-Ang University College of Medicine , Seoul , Republic of Korea
Abstract
Abstract
Measurement uncertainty is a parameter that is associated with the dispersion of measurements. Assessment of the measurement uncertainty is recommended in qualitative analyses in clinical laboratories; however, the measurement uncertainty of qualitative tests has been neglected despite the introduction of many adequate methods. We herein provide an overview of three reasonable statistical methods for quantifying the measurement uncertainties of qualitative assays, namely Bayes’ theorem, the normal distribution method, and the information theoretic approach. Unlike in quantitative analysis, the measurement uncertainty of qualitative analysis is expressed using a conditional probability, likelihood ratio, and entropy. With the necessary theoretical background, the practical applications for clinical laboratories are also provided using statistical calculations. Using statistical approaches, we hope that our review will contribute to the use of measurement uncertainty in qualitative analyses in the clinical laboratory environment.
Subject
Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics
Reference29 articles.
1. Theodorsson E. Uncertainty in measurement and total error: tools for coping with diagnostic uncertainty. Clin Lab Med 2017;37:15–34.
2. ISO. ISO 15189:2012, Medical laboratories – requirements for quality and competence. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO, 2012.
3. JCGM. International vocabulary of metrology – basic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM), 3rd ed. Paris, France: JCGM, 2012.
4. Oosterhuis WP, Bayat H, Armbruster D, Coskun A, Freeman KP, Kallner A, et al. The use of error and uncertainty methods in the medical laboratory. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:209–19.
5. Oosterhuis WP, Theodorsson E. Total error vs. measurement uncertainty: revolution or evolution? Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:235–9.