首页> 外文OA文献 >Statistical methods for monitoring the relationship between the IFCC reference measurement procedure for hemoglobin A(1c) and the designated comparison methods in the United States, Japan, and Sweden
【2h】

Statistical methods for monitoring the relationship between the IFCC reference measurement procedure for hemoglobin A(1c) and the designated comparison methods in the United States, Japan, and Sweden

机译:用于监测IFCC血红蛋白a(1c)参考测量程序与美国,日本和瑞典指定比较方法之间关系的统计方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND: The American Diabetes Association (ADA)/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)/International Diabetes Federation GDFAFCC Consensus Statement on the worldwide standardization of HbA(1c) states that"...[HbA(1c)] results are to be reported world-wide in IFCC units...and derived NGSP units...,using the IFCC-NGSP master equation." METHODS: We describe statistical methods to evaluate and monitor the relationships as expressed in master equations (MEs) between the IFCC Reference Measurement procedure (IFCC-RM) and designated comparison methods (DCMs) [US National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP), Japanese Diabetes Society/Japanese Society for Clinical Chemistry (JDS/JSCC), and Mono-S in Sweden]. We applied these statistics, including uncertainty calculations, to 12 studies in which networks of reference laboratories participated, operating the IFCC-RM and DCMs. RESULTS: For NGSP and Mono-S, slope, intercept, and derived percentage HbA(1c) at the therapeutic target show compliance with the respective MEs in all 12 studies. For JDS/JSCC, a slight deviation is seen in slope and derived percentage HbA(1c) in 2 of the 12 studies. Using the MEs, the uncertainty in an assigned value increases from 0.42 mmol/mol HbA(1c) (IFCC-RM) to 0.47 (NGSP), 0.49 (JDS/JSCC), and 0.51 (Mono-S). CONCLUSIONS: We describe sound statistical methods for the investigation of relations between networks of reference laboratories. Application of these statistical methods to the relationship between the JFCC-RM and DCMs in the US, Japan, and Sweden shows that they are suitable for the purpose, and the results support the applicability of the ADA/EASD/lDF/lFCC Consensus Statement on HbA1c measurement. (C) 2008 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.
机译:背景:美国糖尿病协会(ADA)/欧洲糖尿病研究协会(EASD)/国际糖尿病联合会GDFAFCC关于HbA(1c)全球标准化的共识声明指出,“ ... [HbA(1c)]结果是将使用IFCC-NGSP主方程在全世界以IFCC单位...和衍生的NGSP单位进行报告。”方法:我们描述了统计方法,用于评估和监测IFCC参考测量程序(IFCC-RM)与指定比较方法(DCM)之间的关系,以主方程(ME)表示[美国国家糖化血红蛋白标准化计划(NGSP),日本糖尿病学会/日本临床化学学会(JDS / JSCC)和瑞典的Mono-S]。我们将这些统计数据(包括不确定性计算)应用于参考实验室网络参与的IFCC-RM和DCM运营的12项研究。结果:对于NGSP和Mono-S,在所有12项研究中,治疗目标处的斜率,截距和推导百分数HbA(1c)均显示符合各自的ME。对于JDS / JSCC,在12项研究中的2项中,斜率和派生百分数HbA(1c)略有偏差。使用ME,指定值的不确定性从0.42 mmol / mol HbA(1c)(IFCC-RM)增加到0.47(NGSP),0.49(JDS / JSCC)和0.51(Mono-S)。结论:我们描述了可靠的统计方法,用于调查参考实验室网络之间的关系。将这些统计方法应用于美国,日本和瑞典的JFCC-RM和DCM之间的关系表明,它们很适合此目的,其结果支持ADA / EASD / lDF / lFCC共识声明的适用性。 HbA1c测量。 (C)2008美国临床化学协会。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号