Methods and reagent-lot comparisons by regression analysis: sample size considerations

William Sadler
{"title":"Methods and reagent-lot comparisons by regression analysis: sample size considerations","authors":"William Sadler","doi":"10.1177/00045632241252006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"
 Background: Parametric regression analysis is widely used in methods comparisons and more recently in checking the concordance of test results following receipt of new reagent lots. The greater frequency of reagent-lot evaluations increases pressure to detect bias with smallest possible sample sizes (i.e. smallest consumption of time and resources). This study revisits bias detection using the joint slope, intercept confidence region as an alternative to slope and intercept confidence intervals. 
 Methods: Four cases were considered representing constant errors, proportional errors (constant CV) and two more complicated error patterns typical of immunoassays. Maximum:minimum range ratios varied from 2:1 to 2000:1. After setting a maximum tolerable difference a series of slope, intercept combinations, each of which predicted the critical difference, were systematically evaluated in simulations which determined the minimum sample size required to detect the difference, firstly using slope, intercept confidence intervals and secondly using the joint slope, intercept confidence region.
 Results: At small to moderate range ratios, bias detection by joint confidence region required greatly reduced sample sizes to the extent that it should encourage reagent-lot evaluations or, alternatively, transform those already routinely performed into considerably less costly exercises.
 Conclusions: While some software is available to calculate joint confidence regions in real-life analyses, shifting this testing method into the mainstream will require a greater number of software developers incorporating the necessary code into their regression programs. The computer program used to conduct this study is freely available and can be used to model any laboratory test. 
","PeriodicalId":519215,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical Biochemistry: International Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical Biochemistry: International Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00045632241252006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Parametric regression analysis is widely used in methods comparisons and more recently in checking the concordance of test results following receipt of new reagent lots. The greater frequency of reagent-lot evaluations increases pressure to detect bias with smallest possible sample sizes (i.e. smallest consumption of time and resources). This study revisits bias detection using the joint slope, intercept confidence region as an alternative to slope and intercept confidence intervals. Methods: Four cases were considered representing constant errors, proportional errors (constant CV) and two more complicated error patterns typical of immunoassays. Maximum:minimum range ratios varied from 2:1 to 2000:1. After setting a maximum tolerable difference a series of slope, intercept combinations, each of which predicted the critical difference, were systematically evaluated in simulations which determined the minimum sample size required to detect the difference, firstly using slope, intercept confidence intervals and secondly using the joint slope, intercept confidence region. Results: At small to moderate range ratios, bias detection by joint confidence region required greatly reduced sample sizes to the extent that it should encourage reagent-lot evaluations or, alternatively, transform those already routinely performed into considerably less costly exercises. Conclusions: While some software is available to calculate joint confidence regions in real-life analyses, shifting this testing method into the mainstream will require a greater number of software developers incorporating the necessary code into their regression programs. The computer program used to conduct this study is freely available and can be used to model any laboratory test.
回归分析的方法和后段比较:样本量考虑因素
背景:参数回归分析广泛应用于方法比较,最近还用于检查收到新试剂批次后测试结果的一致性。新试剂批次评估的频率越来越高,这增加了以尽可能小的样本量(即消耗最少的时间和资源)检测偏差的压力。本研究使用联合斜率和截距置信区间作为斜率和截距置信区间的替代方法,重新审视偏差检测:研究考虑了四种情况,分别代表恒定误差、比例误差(恒定 CV)和免疫测定中典型的两种更复杂的误差模式。最大与最小量程比从 2:1 到 2000:1 不等。在设定了最大可容忍差值后,对一系列斜率、截距组合(每个组合都能预测临界差值)进行了系统的模拟评估,以确定检测差值所需的最小样本量,首先使用斜率、截距置信区间,其次使用斜率、截距联合置信区间:在小到中等的范围比率下,使用联合置信区间进行偏差检测所需的样本量大大减少,以至于可以鼓励重新进行试样批次评估,或者将已经常规进行的评估转变为成本更低的评估:虽然目前已有一些软件可以在实际分析中计算联合置信区间,但要将这种测试方法纳入主流,还需要更多的软件开发人员在回归程序中加入必要的代码。用于本研究的计算机程序可以免费获得,并可用于任何实验室测试建模;
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信