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 Experiment Videos

The performance of delta check methods.

L B Sheiner, L A Wheeler, J K Moore

    Clinical Chemistry
    |December 1, 1979
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Delta check methods show similar performance in detecting mislabeled specimens. However, at a 5% false-positive rate, these methods only identify about 50% of actual mislabeling cases.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

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

    Sort by
    Same author

    TTLL12 is required for primary ciliary axoneme formation in polarized epithelial cells.

    bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2023
    Same author

    Child and adolescent psychiatry training in Australia and New Zealand.

    European child & adolescent psychiatry·2019
    Same author

    Patients with the worst outcomes after paracetamol (acetaminophen)-induced liver failure have an early monocytopenia.

    Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2016
    Same author

    Diagnostic inexactitude - Reframing and relabelling Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder for ICD-11 does not solve the problem.

    Medical hypotheses·2015
    Same author

    Comprehensive microRNA profiling in acetaminophen toxicity identifies novel circulating biomarkers for human liver and kidney injury.

    Scientific reports·2015
    Same author

    Inhibition of cyclophilin D by cyclosporin A promotes retinal ganglion cell survival by preventing mitochondrial alteration in ischemic injury.

    Cell death & disease·2014
    Same journal

    From Pooled Cohorts to PREVENT: A Perspective for Clinical Laboratorians.

    Clinical chemistry·2026
    Same journal

    Interlaboratory Comparison of a Glucagon and Oxyntomodulin Immuno-LC-MS/MS Assay: Implications for Diabetes Research.

    Clinical chemistry·2026
    Same journal

    Comparison of Information-Dependent Acquisition and Sequential Window Acquisition of All Theoretical Mass Spectra for Untargeted Drug Testing on a Linear Ion Trap-Pulsing Quadrupole-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometer.

    Clinical chemistry·2026
    Same journal

    Patterns of One-Year Change in HbA1c and Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Metrics in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.

    Clinical chemistry·2026
    Same journal

    TSH Pediatric Reference Intervals: Lack of CALIPER Applicability to US-Based Populations.

    Clinical chemistry·2026
    Same journal

    Rapid Detection of Hemoglobinopathy Variants Using One-Step Library Preparation and Nanopore Sequencing.

    Clinical chemistry·2026
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Laboratory Science
    • Biostatistics
    • Quality Control

    Background:

    • Accurate specimen identification is crucial in laboratory diagnostics.
    • Mislabeled specimens can lead to diagnostic errors and patient harm.
    • Statistical methods are employed to detect potential specimen mislabeling.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To evaluate the performance of existing delta check methods and linear discriminant functions in detecting mislabeled specimens.
    • To compare the true-positive and false-positive rates of these methods.

    Main Methods:

    • Computed true-positive and false-positive rates for three delta check methods and two linear discriminant functions.
    • Used a dataset of specimen pairs with random replacement to calculate true-positive rates.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Analyzed the relationship between true-positive and false-positive rates across methods.

    • Main Results:

    • Delta check methods demonstrated similar performance across the tested range of false-positive rates.
    • At a practical false-positive rate of approximately 5%, delta check methods detected only about 50% of mislabeled specimens.
    • Even with a 1% mislabeling rate, only about 10% of specimens flagged by delta checks were truly mislabeled.

    Conclusions:

    • Existing delta check methods offer comparable performance but have limitations in detecting mislabeled specimens.
    • A significant proportion of flagged specimens may be correctly labeled, indicating a need for improved detection strategies.
    • Further research is needed to enhance the sensitivity and specificity of specimen mislabeling detection techniques.