Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Partitioning biochemical reference data into subgroups: comparison of existing methods.

Ari Lahti1

  • 1Department of Clinical Chemistry, Rikshospitalet University Hospital of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. ari.lahti@rikshospitalet.no

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
|August 26, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Right secondary somatosensory cortex-a promising novel target for the treatment of drug-resistant neuropathic orofacial pain with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Pain·2015
Same author

Detection of outliers in reference distributions: performance of Horn's algorithm.

Clinical chemistry·2005
Same author

Proposal for guidelines to establish common biological reference intervals in large geographical areas for biochemical quantities measured frequently in serum and plasma.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2004
Same author

Partitioning of nongaussian-distributed biochemical reference data into subgroups.

Clinical chemistry·2004
Same author

Impact of subgroup prevalences on partitioning of Gaussian-distributed reference values.

Clinical chemistry·2002
Same author

Objective criteria for partitioning Gaussian-distributed reference values into subgroups.

Clinical chemistry·2002

Comparing four methods for partitioning biochemical reference data, this study finds that newer approaches, focusing on maintaining ideal outlier proportions, offer significant improvements over older methods that rely on distribution differences.

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Biochemistry
  • Biostatistics
  • Reference Interval Determination

Background:

  • Accurate partitioning of biochemical reference data into subgroups is crucial for clinical interpretation.
  • Existing methods for subgrouping reference data have limitations in their statistical approaches.
  • The goal is to establish reliable group-specific reference intervals when appropriate.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the efficacy of four distinct methods for partitioning biochemical reference data into subgroups.
  • To identify the strengths and weaknesses of each method in determining appropriate reference intervals.
  • To evaluate advancements in methods for subgrouping reference data.

Main Methods:

  • Comparison of Sinton et al. and Ichihara and Kawai methods based on quotient of differences and variances.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Evaluation of Harris and Boyd method focusing on maintaining outlier proportions (ideal 2.5%).
  • Assessment of a "new method" with variations designed to overcome drawbacks of previous approaches.

    • Main Results:

    • Sinton et al. criterion may be too stringent, favoring common intervals over group-specific ones.
    • Ichihara and Kawai method can yield inconsistent results due to reliance on variance.
    • Harris and Boyd method shows poor correlation with desired outlier proportions.
    • The "new method" demonstrates improvements by addressing identified weaknesses.

    Conclusions:

    • Methods relying solely on distribution differences (Sinton, Ichihara & Kawai) are less reliable for reference interval partitioning.
    • The principle of maintaining ideal outlier proportions (Harris & Boyd, new method) is a significant improvement.
    • The "new method" offers a more robust and accurate approach to subgrouping biochemical reference data.