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

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.
Accuracy and Precision01:52

Accuracy and Precision

Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.  Highly accurate measurements...
Accuracy and Precision01:52

Accuracy and Precision

Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.  Highly accurate measurements...
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:
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

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...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Development of Fit-for-Purpose, High Quality Proficiency Samples for Interlaboratory Evaluation of RT-PCR Detection of HPAI H5N1 in Milk.

Food and environmental virology·2026
Same author

Evaluation of PCR-Based H5N1 Influenza Detection Methods in Milk from an Interlaboratory Comparison Study Demonstrating Method-Dependent Sensitivity Variability.

Journal of food protection·2026
Same author

Non-Targeted Screening Method for Detecting Temporal Shifts in Spectral Patterns of Methicillin-Resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> and Post Hoc Description of Peak Features.

Microorganisms·2026
Same author

Towards Spectral Variation Analysis: A Data Quality Framework for Non-Targeted Methods.

Molecules (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Test design and results of a method performance characterization study for SPF and UVA-PF testing.

International journal of cosmetic science·2025
Same author

The variability of in vivo sunscreen sun protection factor values.

International journal of cosmetic science·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 10, 2026

Doppler Ultrasound-Based Leg Blood Flow Assessment During Single-Leg Knee-Extensor Exercise in an Uncontrolled Setting
09:18

Doppler Ultrasound-Based Leg Blood Flow Assessment During Single-Leg Knee-Extensor Exercise in an Uncontrolled Setting

Published on: December 15, 2023

Reliability of precision data obtained from interlaboratory studies.

Steffen Uhlig1, Stefanie Eichler, Petra Gowik

  • 1Quo Data GmbH, Kaitzer St 135, D-01187 Dresden, Germany. Uhlig@quodata.de

Journal of AOAC International
|June 18, 2013
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

McClure and Lee's method for assessing interlaboratory test reliability underestimates variability due to bias. A generalized approach using "margins of relative random error" provides a more accurate estimation of precision parameter S(L) variability.

More Related Videos

Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis of Gold Nanoparticles in Aqueous Media through an Inter-Laboratory Comparison
07:08

Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis of Gold Nanoparticles in Aqueous Media through an Inter-Laboratory Comparison

Published on: October 20, 2020

High Precision Zinc Isotopic Measurements Applied to Mouse Organs
07:04

High Precision Zinc Isotopic Measurements Applied to Mouse Organs

Published on: May 22, 2015

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 10, 2026

Doppler Ultrasound-Based Leg Blood Flow Assessment During Single-Leg Knee-Extensor Exercise in an Uncontrolled Setting
09:18

Doppler Ultrasound-Based Leg Blood Flow Assessment During Single-Leg Knee-Extensor Exercise in an Uncontrolled Setting

Published on: December 15, 2023

Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis of Gold Nanoparticles in Aqueous Media through an Inter-Laboratory Comparison
07:08

Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis of Gold Nanoparticles in Aqueous Media through an Inter-Laboratory Comparison

Published on: October 20, 2020

High Precision Zinc Isotopic Measurements Applied to Mouse Organs
07:04

High Precision Zinc Isotopic Measurements Applied to Mouse Organs

Published on: May 22, 2015

Area of Science:

  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Statistical Methods in Science

Background:

  • Precision data, like laboratory-to-laboratory standard deviation (S(L)), are crucial for evaluating analytical test methods.
  • These data, reflecting random error, are inherently variable, necessitating robust interlaboratory study designs for reliable assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the McClure and Lee approach for approximating the reliability of S(L) in interlaboratory studies.
  • To present a generalized approach that accounts for the bias in S(L) for more accurate precision estimation.

Main Methods:

  • Discussion and critique of the McClure and Lee approximation for S(L) reliability.
  • Development and presentation of a generalized approach using "margins of relative random error" to incorporate S(L) bias.

Main Results:

  • The McClure and Lee approximation underestimates S(L) variability by disregarding its inherent negative bias.
  • Achieving desired S(L) reliability typically requires approximately 25% more laboratories than calculated by McClure and Lee.
  • The generalized approach offers a more realistic estimation of S(L) variability by accounting for bias.

Conclusions:

  • The bias in S(L) is a significant factor affecting the reliability of interlaboratory test method assessments.
  • The generalized approach provides a more accurate and reliable method for designing interlaboratory studies and assessing precision parameters.