Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 3, 2026

Using Reference Reagents to Confirm Robustness of Cytokine Release Assays for the Prediction of Monoclonal Antibody Safety
Published on: September 15, 2023
Indirect methods for the verification of reference intervals in laboratory medicine
Georg Hoffmann1,2, Inga Trulson1, Jakob Adler3,4
1Institute of Laboratory Medicine, TUM University Hospital German Heart Center, Munich, Germany.
Clinical laboratories can now use advanced indirect statistical methods to verify reference intervals, improving accuracy and efficiency beyond outdated 20-sample binomial procedures. These new methods offer a more reliable approach to ensure laboratory test result validity.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Chemistry
- Laboratory Medicine
- Biostatistics
Background:
- Accreditation standards mandate periodic verification of laboratory reference intervals against local conditions.
- Current CLSI/IFCC C28-A3 guidelines recommend a 20-sample binomial procedure, which has demonstrated inadequate statistical power and sensitivity.
- Existing verification methods offer a false sense of compliance, necessitating a reassessment of current practices.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically evaluate the limitations of the current 20-sample binomial reference interval verification approach.
- To systematically review methodological advancements in reference interval verification since 2018.
- To advocate for the adoption of indirect statistical methods for more robust and reliable verification.
Main Methods:
- A structured literature search identified 22 relevant publications, supplemented by additional references for comprehensive coverage.
- Evaluation of indirect statistical methods, including open-source R packages (reflimR, refineR) and machine learning techniques.
- Assessment of quantitative acceptance criteria based on equivalence limits (EL) and uncertainty margins (UM).
Main Results:
- Indirect estimation methods, applied to routine laboratory data, demonstrate superior performance compared to the binomial procedure.
- Independent multi-center and multi-method studies confirm the robust performance and comparability of indirect methods across various analytes.
- Machine learning techniques effectively extend verification capabilities to complex datasets, including those with high pathological prevalence.
Conclusions:
- Indirect verification methods have achieved sufficient maturity for guideline endorsement, offering a statistically defensible standard.
- A proposed stepwise workflow integrates reflimR, refineR, and machine learning for efficient and accurate routine laboratory verification.
- New web-based tools and platforms enhance accessibility, enabling practical implementation of these advanced verification strategies.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Microbial Growth Measurement: Direct Methods
Data Validation
Key parameters for method validation include:
Microbial Growth Measurement: Indirect Methods
Automated Microbial Diagnostics
Chemical Shift: Internal References and Solvent Effects
The internal reference compound generally used in NMR spectroscopy is tetramethylsilane (TMS). TMS is preferred because it is chemically inert, soluble in NMR solvents, and easily removable. Also, the highly shielded methyl protons in TMS yield an intense...
EDTA: Indirect and Alkalimetric Titration

