Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 17, 2025
09:28
One-step Metabolomics: Carbohydrates, Organic and Amino Acids Quantified in a Single Procedure
Published on: June 25, 2010
13.3K
[Evaluation of biochemical results]
Steen Antonsen1, Jesper Farup Revsholm2, Lars Koch Hansen3
1Klinisk Biokemisk Afdeling, Odense Universitetshospital, Svendborg Sygehus.
Ugeskrift for Laeger
|July 3, 2025
Summary
Critical difference (KF) is preferred over reference intervals (RI) for monitoring biochemical results due to biological variation. IT systems should offer KF to address RI limitations.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Biochemistry
- Laboratory Medicine
- Medical Diagnostics
Background:
- Reference intervals (RI) are standard for interpreting biochemical test results.
- RI may not accurately reflect significant biological changes in individual patients.
- Monitoring requires methods sensitive to within-person variability.
Purpose of the Study:
- To highlight the limitations of traditional reference intervals (RI) in patient monitoring.
- To advocate for the use of critical difference (KF) in evaluating biochemical results.
- To recommend improvements in laboratory information technology (IT) systems.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing literature on reference intervals and critical difference.
- Analysis of the biological variation (within-person vs. between-person) in biochemical quantities.
- Evaluation of the flexibility and applicability of KF compared to RI.
Main Results:
- The ratio of within-person to between-person variation is often below 0.6 for biochemical markers.
- This ratio indicates that results can change significantly without exceeding conventional RI.
- Personal RI is a less flexible variant of KF.
Conclusions:
- Critical difference (KF) is a superior method for monitoring biochemical results over RI.
- IT systems should be updated to incorporate KF for more accurate patient monitoring.
- Addressing the shortcomings of RI is crucial for effective clinical decision-making.
