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 Concept Videos

Contaminants and Errors01:16

Contaminants and Errors

Effective sample preparation is crucial for accurate and reliable laboratory analysis. During this process, two significant sources of error can arise: concentration bias from improper sample splitting and contamination caused by methods used to reduce particle size, such as grinding or homogenization. Identifying and minimizing these potential errors is crucial to ensuring the validity of the analysis.
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...
Data Validation01:15

Data Validation

Method validation is a crucial process in analytical chemistry designed to confirm that a given method consistently produces reliable and high-quality results. This process is essential when a method is applied to different sample matrices or when procedural modifications are made, ensuring that the results meet acceptable standards across various applications.
Key parameters for method validation include:
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test01:00

Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test

When one or more data points appear far from the rest of the data, there is a need to determine whether they are outliers and whether they should be eliminated from the data set to ensure an accurate representation of the measured value. In many cases, outliers arise from gross errors (or human errors) and do not accurately reflect the underlying phenomenon. In some cases, however, these apparent outliers reflect true phenomenological differences. In these cases, we can use statistical methods...
Development of Analytical Methods01:21

Development of Analytical Methods

An analytical methodology can be divided into four sequential steps: technique, method, procedure, and protocol. A technique is a scientific principle that rationalizes a specific phenomenon through chemical measurements. Adapting a technique for analyzing a sample of interest is termed a method. The procedure outlines the directions for performing the analysis via an analytical method. The protocol is the detailed guidelines on the procedure, which should be strictly followed to obtain the...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Minimum requirements for continuous glucose monitors: What does it mean?

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2025
Same author

Continuous Glucose Monitor Agreement Rates: A Questionable Metric.

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2025
Same author

Validation of the Diabetes Technology Society Error Grid.

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2025
Same author

The Diabetes Technology Society Error Grid and Trend Accuracy Matrix for Glucose Monitors.

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2024
Same author

Proposed Recommendations for Continuous Glucose Monitor Method Comparisons.

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2024
Same author

Comparing Clinical Accuracy and Analytical Accuracy Between Continuous Glucose Monitors.

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 1, 2026

A Sample Preparation Pipeline for Microcrystals at the VMXm Beamline
09:00

A Sample Preparation Pipeline for Microcrystals at the VMXm Beamline

Published on: June 17, 2021

Towards more complete specifications for acceptable analytical performance - a plea for error grid analysis.

Jan S Krouwer1, George S Cembrowski

  • 1Krouwer Consulting, Sherborn, MA 01770, USA. jan.krouwer@comcast.net

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
|May 31, 2011
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Current analytical performance specifications for quantitative assays are limited. Error grids and risk management offer a more comprehensive approach to evaluating assay performance and patient safety.

More Related Videos

Making Record-efficiency SnS Solar Cells by Thermal Evaporation and Atomic Layer Deposition
14:01

Making Record-efficiency SnS Solar Cells by Thermal Evaporation and Atomic Layer Deposition

Published on: May 22, 2015

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS
14:58

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS

Published on: February 17, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 1, 2026

A Sample Preparation Pipeline for Microcrystals at the VMXm Beamline
09:00

A Sample Preparation Pipeline for Microcrystals at the VMXm Beamline

Published on: June 17, 2021

Making Record-efficiency SnS Solar Cells by Thermal Evaporation and Atomic Layer Deposition
14:01

Making Record-efficiency SnS Solar Cells by Thermal Evaporation and Atomic Layer Deposition

Published on: May 22, 2015

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS
14:58

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS

Published on: February 17, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Laboratory Medicine
  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Clinical Diagnostics

Background:

  • Current analytical performance specifications for quantitative assays have significant limitations.
  • These include incomplete error modeling, exclusion of user error, and insufficient protocol requirements.
  • Existing specifications often fail to capture the full spectrum of potential analytical errors and their clinical impact.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify and discuss the limitations of common analytical performance specifications for quantitative assays.
  • To propose error grids and risk management as superior methods for evaluating assay performance.
  • To provide a framework for addressing the shortcomings of current specification models.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing analytical performance specification guidelines.
  • Analysis of limitations in current models, including total error and error categorization.
  • Introduction and explanation of error grid methodology for comprehensive data analysis.
  • Application of risk management principles to address outer error grid regions.

Main Results:

  • Common specifications inadequately cover assay performance by often considering only 95% of results.
  • Existing models fail to differentiate severity of harm and do not account for user error.
  • Error grids provide a 100% data coverage and stratify errors by severity, enhancing safety assessment.
  • Risk management techniques are essential for defining outer error grid boundaries and ensuring robust protocols.

Conclusions:

  • Current analytical performance specifications are insufficient for ensuring reliable quantitative assay performance.
  • Error grids combined with risk management offer a more robust and clinically relevant framework for assay evaluation.
  • Adoption of these advanced methods is crucial for improving patient safety and diagnostic accuracy in laboratory medicine.