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

Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring01:25

Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring

Blood pressure monitoring is a crucial clinical procedure in diagnosing and managing various cardiovascular conditions. Despite its significance, the accuracy of blood pressure measurements can be compromised by multiple factors, potentially leading to either falsely high or low readings. These inaccuracies are critical as they can significantly impact patient care. So, it is vital to understand these challenges deeply and adopt strategic approaches to minimize errors.
Several factors...
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...
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...
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...
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...
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

The role of health institutions in the epidemiological surveillance of arboviral diseases in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil: notification, hospitalization, and regional differences.

BMC public health·2026
Same author

Prevalence of Hepatitis E Virus Infection Among Pregnant Women in Tunisia: Findings from a Large Cohort Study.

Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Navigating open data sharing and privacy in the age of clinical AI research: from reidentification to pseudo-reidentification.

EClinicalMedicine·2026
Same author

Memantine Confers Multi-Target Protection in a Zebrafish Seizure Model: Attenuating Epileptic Behavior, GluN2A Overexpression, and Oxidative Stress.

Journal of neurochemistry·2026
Same author

Enhancing Soldiers for Future Warfare: Good Science; Bad Ethics?

Science and engineering ethics·2025
Same author

Correction: Surveillance of respiratory viruses in severe acute respiratory infections in Southern Brazil, 2023-2024.

BMC infectious diseases·2025
Same journal

Establishing a Laboratory Biorisk Management Assessment Tool for Indonesia.

Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association·2026
Same journal

Implementation of a Biorisk Management System in Armenia for ISO 35001:2019 Certification.

Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association·2026
Same journal

More than Skin Deep: Primary Inoculation with <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> as an Occupational Hazard.

Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association·2026
Same journal

Effective Communication at a High-Containment Facility: How Information Consistency and Sufficiency Affect Knowledge, Risk Perceptions, and Community Preparedness for Potential Biological Hazards.

Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association·2026
Same journal

How Forming a Department-Specific Employee Safety Team Impacted Mitigating Risk and Improving the Safety Culture in an Animal Resources Core Facility.

Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association·2026
Same journal

Articulating Biosafety Program Activities in the Context of a Simplified Public Health Logic Model.

Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 22, 2026

Aseptic Laboratory Techniques: Volume Transfers with Serological Pipettes and Micropipettors
11:43

Aseptic Laboratory Techniques: Volume Transfers with Serological Pipettes and Micropipettors

Published on: May 31, 2012

Rate of Errors During Routine Biological Manipulations.

Kelly N Kim1, Henry L Wyneken1, Joan M Ryan2

  • 1Gryphon Scientific, Takoma Park, Maryland, USA.

Applied Biosafety : Journal of the American Biological Safety Association
|March 28, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Human error rates in life science labs are estimated at 4-8 per 1,000 manipulations. Many errors go unnoticed, highlighting the need for improved biosafety practices and training.

Keywords:
biorisk managementbiosafetyerror ratehuman reliabilitylaboratory procedureslaboratory safety

More Related Videos

Genome-wide Surveillance of Transcription Errors in Eukaryotic Organisms
09:30

Genome-wide Surveillance of Transcription Errors in Eukaryotic Organisms

Published on: September 13, 2018

Detection of Targetable Alterations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer using Next-generation Sequencing
05:17

Detection of Targetable Alterations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer using Next-generation Sequencing

Published on: October 10, 2025

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 22, 2026

Aseptic Laboratory Techniques: Volume Transfers with Serological Pipettes and Micropipettors
11:43

Aseptic Laboratory Techniques: Volume Transfers with Serological Pipettes and Micropipettors

Published on: May 31, 2012

Genome-wide Surveillance of Transcription Errors in Eukaryotic Organisms
09:30

Genome-wide Surveillance of Transcription Errors in Eukaryotic Organisms

Published on: September 13, 2018

Detection of Targetable Alterations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer using Next-generation Sequencing
05:17

Detection of Targetable Alterations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer using Next-generation Sequencing

Published on: October 10, 2025

Area of Science:

  • Biosafety and Laboratory Practices
  • Human Reliability in Scientific Research

Background:

  • Quantitative data on human reliability in life science laboratories is scarce.
  • Understanding error rates is crucial for enhancing biosafety protocols.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To conduct the first large-scale investigation into human reliability in life science labs.
  • To estimate error rates during routine biological experiments.

Main Methods:

  • Two experimental approaches were used: blinded clinical experiments in Brazil, Jordan, and Tunisia, and volunteer experiments in U.S. university training labs.
  • GloGerm was utilized to detect spills during laboratory manipulations.
  • Error rates were assessed by observing routine workflows and repetitive pipetting tasks.

Main Results:

  • The median error rate for volunteers was estimated at 4 errors per 1,000 manipulations for experienced individuals and 8 errors per 1,000 manipulations for less experienced individuals.
  • Error rates from blinded clinical and volunteer experiments were comparable.
  • Volunteers identified a maximum of 52% of their own errors, indicating a significant underestimation of mistakes.

Conclusions:

  • Volunteer studies using non-hazardous materials can effectively replicate real laboratory conditions for biosafety research.
  • Findings underscore the prevalence of unnoticed errors in laboratory settings.
  • The study provides critical data to inform and improve biosafety practices.