Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening

W. Greg Miller, James M. McKenney, Margaret R. Conner, Vernon Chinchilli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We report the accuracy, imprecision, total analytical errors, and patient misclassification errors for cholesterol measured from capillary whole blood, venous whole blood, and venous plasma samples by five devices used in public cholesterol screening environments: Reflotron, Vision, Ektachem DT-60, QuickRead, and Liposcan. None of the methods met the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) performance recommendations of 3% CV with 3% bias. The Vision and Reflotron methods used with venous samples gave individual results with total errors consistent with a combined CV and bias in the 4-5% range; capillary blood samples had total errors >5% (combined CV and bias criteria). The DT-60 performance was near the 5% total error criterion for capillary samples and was >5% for venous samples. Misclassification of individuals into desirable or referral groups for venous samples was as great as 5.1% for the DT-60, 5.7% for the Vision, and 7.1% for the Reflotron. Misclas sifications for capillary blood samples were as great as 6.7%, 18.3%, and 14.1% for DT-60, Vision, and Reflotron, respectively. The QuickRead and Liposcan results were substantially poorer than those obtained by the other methods.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)297-304
Number of pages8
JournalClinical Chemistry
Volume39
Issue number2
StatePublished - 1993

Fingerprint

Screening
Cholesterol
Blood
Referral and Consultation
Education
Equipment and Supplies
Plasmas

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Clinical Biochemistry

Cite this

Greg Miller, W., McKenney, J. M., Conner, M. R., & Chinchilli, V. (1993). Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening. Clinical Chemistry, 39(2), 297-304.
Greg Miller, W. ; McKenney, James M. ; Conner, Margaret R. ; Chinchilli, Vernon. / Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening. In: Clinical Chemistry. 1993 ; Vol. 39, No. 2. pp. 297-304.
@article{7746b7a96e7b4c789d64bbac99051af9,
title = "Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening",
abstract = "We report the accuracy, imprecision, total analytical errors, and patient misclassification errors for cholesterol measured from capillary whole blood, venous whole blood, and venous plasma samples by five devices used in public cholesterol screening environments: Reflotron, Vision, Ektachem DT-60, QuickRead, and Liposcan. None of the methods met the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) performance recommendations of 3{\%} CV with 3{\%} bias. The Vision and Reflotron methods used with venous samples gave individual results with total errors consistent with a combined CV and bias in the 4-5{\%} range; capillary blood samples had total errors >5{\%} (combined CV and bias criteria). The DT-60 performance was near the 5{\%} total error criterion for capillary samples and was >5{\%} for venous samples. Misclassification of individuals into desirable or referral groups for venous samples was as great as 5.1{\%} for the DT-60, 5.7{\%} for the Vision, and 7.1{\%} for the Reflotron. Misclas sifications for capillary blood samples were as great as 6.7{\%}, 18.3{\%}, and 14.1{\%} for DT-60, Vision, and Reflotron, respectively. The QuickRead and Liposcan results were substantially poorer than those obtained by the other methods.",
author = "{Greg Miller}, W. and McKenney, {James M.} and Conner, {Margaret R.} and Vernon Chinchilli",
year = "1993",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "297--304",
journal = "Clinical Chemistry",
issn = "0009-9147",
publisher = "American Association for Clinical Chemistry Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Greg Miller, W, McKenney, JM, Conner, MR & Chinchilli, V 1993, 'Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening', Clinical Chemistry, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 297-304.

Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening. / Greg Miller, W.; McKenney, James M.; Conner, Margaret R.; Chinchilli, Vernon.

In: Clinical Chemistry, Vol. 39, No. 2, 1993, p. 297-304.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Total error assessment of five methods for cholesterol screening

AU - Greg Miller, W.

AU - McKenney, James M.

AU - Conner, Margaret R.

AU - Chinchilli, Vernon

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - We report the accuracy, imprecision, total analytical errors, and patient misclassification errors for cholesterol measured from capillary whole blood, venous whole blood, and venous plasma samples by five devices used in public cholesterol screening environments: Reflotron, Vision, Ektachem DT-60, QuickRead, and Liposcan. None of the methods met the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) performance recommendations of 3% CV with 3% bias. The Vision and Reflotron methods used with venous samples gave individual results with total errors consistent with a combined CV and bias in the 4-5% range; capillary blood samples had total errors >5% (combined CV and bias criteria). The DT-60 performance was near the 5% total error criterion for capillary samples and was >5% for venous samples. Misclassification of individuals into desirable or referral groups for venous samples was as great as 5.1% for the DT-60, 5.7% for the Vision, and 7.1% for the Reflotron. Misclas sifications for capillary blood samples were as great as 6.7%, 18.3%, and 14.1% for DT-60, Vision, and Reflotron, respectively. The QuickRead and Liposcan results were substantially poorer than those obtained by the other methods.

AB - We report the accuracy, imprecision, total analytical errors, and patient misclassification errors for cholesterol measured from capillary whole blood, venous whole blood, and venous plasma samples by five devices used in public cholesterol screening environments: Reflotron, Vision, Ektachem DT-60, QuickRead, and Liposcan. None of the methods met the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) performance recommendations of 3% CV with 3% bias. The Vision and Reflotron methods used with venous samples gave individual results with total errors consistent with a combined CV and bias in the 4-5% range; capillary blood samples had total errors >5% (combined CV and bias criteria). The DT-60 performance was near the 5% total error criterion for capillary samples and was >5% for venous samples. Misclassification of individuals into desirable or referral groups for venous samples was as great as 5.1% for the DT-60, 5.7% for the Vision, and 7.1% for the Reflotron. Misclas sifications for capillary blood samples were as great as 6.7%, 18.3%, and 14.1% for DT-60, Vision, and Reflotron, respectively. The QuickRead and Liposcan results were substantially poorer than those obtained by the other methods.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027450736&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027450736&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 297

EP - 304

JO - Clinical Chemistry

JF - Clinical Chemistry

SN - 0009-9147

IS - 2

ER -