PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11805016

Objective criteria for partitioning Gaussian-distributed reference values into subgroups.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop new and useful criteria for partitioning reference values into subgroups applicable to gaussian distributions and to distributions that can be transformed to gaussian distributions. METHODS: The proposed criteria relate to percentages of the subgroups outside each of the reference limits of the combined distribution. Critical values suggested as partitioning criteria for these percentages were derived from analytical bias quality specifications for using common reference intervals throughout a geographic area. As alternative partitioning criteria to the actual percentages, these were transformed mathematically to critical distances between the reference limits of the subgroup distributions, to be applied to each pair of reference limits, the upper and the lower, at a time. The new criteria were tested using data on various plasma proteins collected from approximately 500 reference individuals, and the outcomes were compared with those given by the currently widely applied and recommended partitioning model of Harris and Boyd, the "Harris-Boyd model". RESULTS: We suggest 4.1% as the critical minimum percentage outside that would justify partitioning into subgroups, and 3.2% as the critical maximum percentage outside that would justify combining them. Percentages between these two values should be classified as marginal, implying that nonstatistical considerations are required to make the final decision on partitioning. The correlation between the critical percentages and the critical distances was mathematically precise in the new model, whereas this correlation is rather approximate in the Harris-Boyd model because focus on the difference between means in this model makes high precision hard to achieve. The application examples suggested that the new model is more radical than the Harris-Boyd model. CONCLUSIONS: New percentage and distance criteria, to be used for partitioning gaussian-distributed data, have been developed. The distance criteria, applied separately to both reference limit pairs of the subgroup distributions, seemed more reliable and correlated more accurately with the critical percentages than the distance criteria of the Harris-Boyd model. As opposed to the Harris-Boyd model, the new model is easily adjustable to new critical values of the percentages, should they need to be changed in the future.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ari Lahti, Per Hyltoft Petersen, James C Boyd, Callum G Fraser, Nils Jørgensen. 2002. Objective criteria for partitioning Gaussian-distributed reference values into subgroups.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11805016/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Clinical laboratory consultation: appropriateness to laboratory medicine.

New and expensive treatments, introduction of difficult to interpret complex tests, a greater reliance on nurse practitioners as deliverers of primary care and patient initiated testing, all make it likely that in the future greater emphasis will be placed on appropriate use of cost-effective laboratory tests. The most promising solution to inappropriate utilization of laboratory services is a greater reliance on clinical laboratory consultants. At present, many laboratory physicians and scientists cannot compete with specialist physicians in terms of the ability to provide credible helpful advice on test selection and results interpretation. Educational prerequisites to effective consultation are: understanding of disease pathogenesis, knowledge of clinical problem solving and identification with clinical questions. The latter requires clinical experience or intensive training in clinical laboratory consultation. Further barriers to implementation of comprehensive laboratory consultation services include resistance on the part of practicing physicians, health care administrators and insurers. Whether these barriers can be overcome or not, the future will include comprehensive laboratory consultation services conducted through web-based access to advice on test selection and interpretation of results.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗

Appropriateness in programs for continuous quality improvement in clinical laboratories.

BACKGROUND: External reviews and the accreditation of medical laboratories involve more than the mere assessment of conformance with standards for organisational processes. The new approaches to quality improvement suggest that, rather than using inspection to correct unusual errors, there should be more emphasis on improving the processes of health care to ensure that desired outcomes are produced. Appropriateness plays a key role in programs for quality improvement. METHODS: Appropriateness in laboratory medicine can be assessed, and improved, through the governance of the entire testing process. This begins with test selection, proceeds through valuable pre-, intra- and post-analytical procedures, and concludes by assuring the correct interpretation and utilization of laboratory information. RESULTS: The International Standard, specifically developed for medical laboratories (ISO 15189) recognizes the value of appropriate interpretation and advisory services, although it does not specify requirements for assessing appropriateness, requesting tests and interpreting results. The effectiveness of clinical laboratories can be assessed by using surrogate markers, which indicate physicians' satisfaction, and clinical audits. Effectiveness is also enhanced by stressing the importance of the technical and professional competence of evaluators. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate laboratory utilization unjustifiably increases health care costs, can harm patients and perpetuates the vision of laboratory testing as a commodity. Improvement in laboratory appropriateness can be achieved by seeking a better relationship with physicians and by stressing the role of laboratory specialists in providing clinical advice for the selection of laboratory tests, and the interpretation and utilization of their results, thus leading to more satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗