Detailed Information

Cited 2 time in webofscience Cited 3 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Comparison between polynomial regression and weighted least squares regression analysis for verification of analytical measurement rangeopen access

Authors
Jeong, Tae-DongKim, Soo-KyungKim, SollipLim, Chi-YeonChung, Jae-Woo
Issue Date
Jun-2022
Publisher
De Gruyter
Keywords
analytical measurement range; linearity; polynomial regression; verification; weighted least-squares regression
Citation
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, v.60, no.7, pp 989 - 994
Pages
6
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
Volume
60
Number
7
Start Page
989
End Page
994
URI
https://scholarworks.dongguk.edu/handle/sw.dongguk/2936
DOI
10.1515/cclm-2022-0018
ISSN
1434-6621
1437-4331
Abstract
Objectives Recently, the linearity evaluation protocol by the Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) has been revised from EP6-A to EP6-ED2, with the statistical method of interpreting linearity evaluation data being changed from polynomial regression to weighted least squares linear regression (WLS). We analyzed and compared the analytical measurement range (AMR) verification results according to the present and prior linearity evaluation guidelines. Methods The verification of AMR of clinical chemistry tests was performed using five samples with two replicates in three different laboratories. After analyzing the same evaluation data in each laboratory by the polynomial regression analysis and WLS methods, results were compared to determine whether linearity was verified across the five sample concentrations. In addition, whether the 90% confidence interval of deviation from linearity by WLS was included in the allowable deviation from linearity (ADL) was compared. Results A linearity of 42.3-56.8% of the chemistry items was verified by polynomial regression analysis in three laboratories. For analysis of the same data by WLS, a linearity of 63.5-78.3% of the test items was verified where the deviation from linearity of all five samples was within the ADL criteria, and the cases where the 90% confidence interval of all deviation from linearity overlapped the ADL was 78.8-91.3%. Conclusions Interpreting AMR verification data by the WLS method according to the newly revised CLSI document EP6-ED2 could reduce laboratory workload, enabling efficient laboratory practice.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
Graduate School > Department of Medicine > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Related Researcher

Researcher Chung, Jae Woo photo

Chung, Jae Woo
Graduate School (Department of Medicine)
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE