English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The long-anticipated ISO/TS 20914,  Medical laboratories – Practical guidance for the estimation of measurement uncertainty , became publicly available in July 2019. This ISO document is intended as a guide for the practical application of estimating uncertainty in measurement (measurement uncertainty) in a medical laboratory. In some respects, the guide does indeed meet many of its stated objectives with numerous very detailed examples. Even though it is claimed that this ISO guide is based on the  Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement  (GUM), JCGM 100:2008, it is with some concern that we believe several important statements and statistical procedures are incorrect, with others potentially misleading. The aim of this report is to highlight the major concerns which we have identified. In particular, we believe the following items require further comment: (1) The use of coefficient of variation and its potential for misuse requires clarification, (2) pooled variance and measurement uncertainty across changes in measuring conditions has been oversimplified and is potentially misleading, (3) uncertainty in the results of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) do not include all known uncertainties, (4) the international normalized ratio (INR) calculation is incorrect, (5) the treatment of bias uncertainty is considered problematic, (6) the rules for evaluating combined uncertainty in functional relationships are incomplete, and (7) specific concerns with some individual statements.

ISO/TS 20914:2019 – a critical commentary