Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Automated Microbial Diagnostics

Automated Microbial Diagnostics

Automated diagnostic analyzers have transformed clinical microbiology by providing rapid and reliable methods for pathogen identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing. Among these systems, the Vitek 2 is widely used because it automates the traditionally labor-intensive processes of microbial identification (ID) and antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST), delivering standardized and timely results that are essential for effective patient care.Microbial Identification with ID CardsThe...

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

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...

Random and Systematic Errors

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...

Mismatch Repair

Mismatch Repair

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

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...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Regression Using 20 Samples to Harmonize a Point-of-Care Analyzer With a Commercial Laboratory Analyzer for Feline Plasma Biochemistry Testing.

Veterinary clinical pathology·2026

Same author

Digital Cytopathology Quality Guidelines.

Veterinary clinical pathology·2026

Same author

Calculating the predictive value of the orthogonal testing approach and its use in clinical decision-making.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2025

Same author

Review of biological variation and its applications in interpretation of equine clinical pathology results.

Equine veterinary journal·2025

Same author

Impact of regression modeling on the assessment and harmonization of a point-of-care analyzer and commercial laboratory analyzer for feline plasma biochemistry testing.

Veterinary clinical pathology·2024

Same author

A Portable Fluid Administration System for Prolonged Intravenous Fluid Administration in Subadult and Adult White Rhinoceroses (Ceratotherium simum).

Zoo biology·2024

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 22, 2026

Application of the Intelligent High-Throughput Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing/Phage Screening System and Lar Index of Antimicrobial Resistance

Application of the Intelligent High-Throughput Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing/Phage Screening System and Lar Index of Antimicrobial Resistance

Published on: July 21, 2023

An error management system in a veterinary clinical laboratory.

Emma Hooijberg¹, Ernst Leidinger, Kathleen P Freeman

¹Invitro Laboratory for Veterinary Diagnostics and Hygiene, Vienna, Austria. emma.hooijberg@invitro.at

Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation : Official Publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc

|April 25, 2012

Summary

Implementing an error management system in veterinary labs reduced error rates significantly, with preanalytical errors being the most common. This system demonstrably improves laboratory quality over time.

More Related Videos

Multiplexed Fluorometric ImmunoAssay Testing Methodology and Troubleshooting

Multiplexed Fluorometric ImmunoAssay Testing Methodology and Troubleshooting

Published on: December 12, 2011

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 22, 2026

Application of the Intelligent High-Throughput Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing/Phage Screening System and Lar Index of Antimicrobial Resistance

Application of the Intelligent High-Throughput Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing/Phage Screening System and Lar Index of Antimicrobial Resistance

Published on: July 21, 2023

Multiplexed Fluorometric ImmunoAssay Testing Methodology and Troubleshooting

Multiplexed Fluorometric ImmunoAssay Testing Methodology and Troubleshooting

Published on: December 12, 2011

Area of Science:

Veterinary Diagnostics
Clinical Laboratory Science
Quality Management Systems

Background:

Error recording and management are crucial for clinical laboratory quality.
Analyzing errors drives corrective actions and process improvements.
Laboratory errors are categorized as preanalytical, analytical, or postanalytical.

Purpose of the Study:

Introduce an error management system in a veterinary diagnostic laboratory.
Examine the quantity and types of errors recorded from 2003 to 2010.
Compare veterinary laboratory error data with human diagnostic laboratories.

Main Methods:

Reviewed annual error reports from an established error recording system.
Calculated annual error rates per total number of samples.
Categorized errors (preanalytical, analytical, postanalytical, other) and examined frequencies.
Calculated sigma metrics for error categories.

Main Results:

Annual error rates decreased from 1.3% in 2003 to 0.7% in 2010.
Preanalytical errors constituted the majority (52-77%), followed by postanalytical (9-21%), analytical (4-14%), and other (6-19%).
Sigma metrics ranged from 4.1 to 4.7, comparable to human clinical laboratories.

Conclusions:

The implemented error management system led to a measurable annual reduction in laboratory errors.
Veterinary diagnostic laboratory error profiles are comparable to those in human clinical laboratories.
Continuous error management is effective for enhancing overall laboratory quality.