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

Data Validation

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 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...

Uncertainty: Overview

Uncertainty: Overview

In analytical chemistry, we often perform repetitive measurements to detect and minimize inaccuracies caused by both determinate and indeterminate errors. Despite the cares we take, the presence of random errors means that repeated measurements almost never have exactly the same magnitude. The collective difference between these measurements - observed values - and the estimated or expected value is called uncertainty. Uncertainty is conventionally written after the estimated or expected value.

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...

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

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.

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

A complete procedure to test a claim about population standard deviation or population variance is explained here.
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Multifunctional skin-like electronics for quantitative, clinical monitoring of cutaneous wound healing.

Advanced healthcare materials·2014

Same author

3D multifunctional integumentary membranes for spatiotemporal cardiac measurements and stimulation across the entire epicardium.

Nature communications·2014

Same author

Mechanics of finger-tip electronics.

Journal of applied physics·2013

Same author

Ultrathin conformal devices for precise and continuous thermal characterization of human skin.

Nature materials·2013

Same author

Silicon nanomembranes for fingertip electronics.

Nanotechnology·2012

Same author

Solid state spectroelectrochemistry of redox reactions in polypyrrole/oxide molecular heterojunctions.

Analytical chemistry·2012

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 19, 2025

Quantitative Detection of Trace Explosive Vapors by Programmed Temperature Desorption Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detector

Quantitative Detection of Trace Explosive Vapors by Programmed Temperature Desorption Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detector

Published on: July 25, 2014

A practical approach to estimate analytical method variability from routine testing.

Andrew P Bonifas¹, Yi Li²

¹Gilead Alberta ULC, 1021 Hayter Road NW, Edmonton, AB T6S 1A1, Canada.

Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

|July 25, 2024

Summary

A new method evaluates analytical test method variability during routine use. This approach ensures pharmaceutical product quality and supports method lifecycle management for robust, cost-effective verification programs.

Keywords:

Analytical method Analytical method lifecycle Analytical variability Continued procedure performance verification Method uncertainity Method variability

More Related Videos

Selected Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry for Absolute Protein Quantification

Selected Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry for Absolute Protein Quantification

Published on: August 17, 2015

A Small-Scale Setup for Algal Toxicity Testing of Nanomaterials and Other Difficult Substances

A Small-Scale Setup for Algal Toxicity Testing of Nanomaterials and Other Difficult Substances

Published on: October 10, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 19, 2025

Quantitative Detection of Trace Explosive Vapors by Programmed Temperature Desorption Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detector

Quantitative Detection of Trace Explosive Vapors by Programmed Temperature Desorption Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detector

Published on: July 25, 2014

Selected Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry for Absolute Protein Quantification

Selected Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry for Absolute Protein Quantification

Published on: August 17, 2015

A Small-Scale Setup for Algal Toxicity Testing of Nanomaterials and Other Difficult Substances

A Small-Scale Setup for Algal Toxicity Testing of Nanomaterials and Other Difficult Substances

Published on: October 10, 2020

Area of Science:

Pharmaceutical Analysis
Analytical Method Lifecycle Management

Background:

Analytical method performance is crucial for pharmaceutical product quality and efficacy.
Continued verification of method attributes like bias and precision is essential throughout a method's lifecycle, as per USP <1220> and ICH Q14.
Maturing verification programs necessitate advanced, cost-effective monitoring tools.

Purpose of the Study:

To present a novel methodology for evaluating analytical method variability directly from routine execution data.
To demonstrate the methodology's implementation for a specific liquid chromatographic assay.
To discuss approaches for data reduction, broader applicability, and use in method development.

Main Methods:

Developed a novel methodology to assess analytical method variability using routine data.
Applied the methodology to a small molecule liquid chromatography assay with single-point external calibration.
Explored strategies for data minimization and expanding the method's scope.

Main Results:

The presented methodology enables direct evaluation of analytical method variability from routine results.
Implementation was successfully demonstrated on a liquid chromatographic assay.
Considerations for reducing data requirements and increasing applicability were addressed.

Conclusions:

The novel methodology offers a robust and cost-effective approach for continued analytical method verification.
It aids in identifying variability sources during method development and selecting optimal replication strategies.
This facilitates a comprehensive understanding of method variability across the entire method lifecycle.