Home Using the hazard ratio to evaluate allowable total error in predictive measurands
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Using the hazard ratio to evaluate allowable total error in predictive measurands

  • Arne Åsberg EMAIL logo , Ingrid Hov Odsæter , Gustav Mikkelsen and Gunhild Garmo Hov
Published/Copyright: January 9, 2016

Abstract

Background: Allowable total error is usually derived from data on biological variation or from state-of-the-art of measuring technology. Here we present a new principle for evaluating allowable total error when the concentration of the analyte (the measurand) is used for prediction: What are the predictive consequences of allowable total errors in terms of errors in the estimate of the hazard ratio (HR)?

Methods: We explored the effect of analytical measurement errors on Cox regression estimates of HR. Published data on Cox regression coefficients were used to illustrate the effect of measurement errors on predicting cardiovascular events or death based on serum concentration of cholesterol and on progression of chronic kidney disease to kidney failure based on serum concentrations of albumin, bicarbonate, calcium and phosphate, and urine albumin/creatinine-ratio.

Results: If the acceptable error in the estimate of the HR is 10%, allowable total errors in serum cholesterol, bicarbonate and phosphate are approximately the same as allowable total error based on biological variation, while allowable total error in serum albumin and calcium are a little larger than estimates based on biological variation.

Conclusions: Evaluating allowable total error from its effect on the estimate of HR is universally applicable to measurands used for prediction.


Corresponding author: Arne Åsberg, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Trondheim University Hospital, 7006 Trondheim, Norway, E-mail:

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. D’Agostino RB Sr, Vasan RS, Pencina MJ, Wolf PA, Cobain M, Massaro JM, et al. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: The Framingham heart study. Circulation 2008;117:743–53.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.699579Search in Google Scholar

2. Ricós C, Álvarez V, Perich C, Fernández-Calle P, Minchinela J, Cava F, et al. Rationale for using data on biological variation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:863–70.10.1515/cclm-2014-1142Search in Google Scholar

3. Klee GG. Establishment of outcome-related analytic performance goals. Clin Chem 2010;56:714–22.10.1373/clinchem.2009.133660Search in Google Scholar

4. Sandberg S, Fraser CG, Horvath AR, Jansen R, Jones G, Oosterhuis W, et al. Defining analytical performance specifications: consensus statement from the 1st strategic conference of the European federation of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:833–5.10.1515/cclm-2015-0067Search in Google Scholar

5. Campbell MJ. Statistics at square two: understanding modern statistical applications in medicine, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006:53–66.10.1002/9780470755839.ch4Search in Google Scholar

6. Selmer R, Lindman AS, Tverdal A, Pedersen JI, Njølstad I, Veierød MB. Model for estimation of cardiovascular risk in Norway. [Article in Norwegian.] Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2008;128:286–90. Method details at: http://www.tidsskriftet.no/filer/norrisappendiks.pdf. Accessed: 3 September 2015.Search in Google Scholar

7. Conroy RM, Pyörälä K, Fitzgerald AP, Sans S, Menotti A, De Backer G, et al. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. Eur Heart J 2003;24:987–1003.10.1016/S0195-668X(03)00114-3Search in Google Scholar

8. Tangri N, Stevens LA, Griffith J, Tighiouart H, Djurdjev O, Naimark D, et al. A predictive model for progression of chronic kidney disease to kidney failure. J Am Med Assoc 2011;305:1553–9.10.1001/jama.2011.451Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Åsberg A, Odsæter IH, Carlsen SM, Mikkelsen G. Using the likelihood ratio to evaluate allowable total error – an example with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1459–64.10.1515/cclm-2014-1125Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Fraser CG, Petersen PH. Desirable standards for laboratory tests if they are to fulfill medical needs. Clin Chem 1993;39:1447–53.10.1093/clinchem/39.7.1447Search in Google Scholar

11. Ricos C, Alvarez V, Cava F, Garcia-Lario JV, Hernandez A, Jimenez CV, et al. Current databases on biologic variation: pros, cons and progress. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999;59:491–500. Updated 2014 at: http://www.westgard.com/biodatabase1.htm. Accessed: 5 August 2015.10.1080/00365519950185229Search in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Gowans EM, Hyltoft Petersen P, Blaabjerg O, Hørder M. Analytical goals for the acceptance of common reference intervals for laboratories throughout a geographical area. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1988;48:757–64.10.3109/00365518809088757Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2015-9-15
Accepted: 2015-11-29
Published Online: 2016-1-9
Published in Print: 2016-8-1

©2016 by De Gruyter

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorials
  3. Laboratory analytical quality – the process continues
  4. Measurement uncertainty – a revised understanding of its calculation and use
  5. Review
  6. Substrate-zymography: a still worthwhile method for gelatinases analysis in biological samples
  7. Opinion Papers
  8. Is the combination of trueness and precision in one expression meaningful? On the use of total error and uncertainty in clinical chemistry
  9. The problem with total error models in establishing performance specifications and a simple remedy
  10. Measurement uncertainty for clinical laboratories – a revision of the concept
  11. Uncertainty in measurement and total error – are they so incompatible?
  12. General Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
  13. Using the hazard ratio to evaluate allowable total error in predictive measurands
  14. Performance of electrolyte measurements assessed by a trueness verification program
  15. Analytical interference by monoclonal immunoglobulins on the direct bilirubin AU Beckman Coulter assay: the benefit of unsuspected diagnosis from spurious results
  16. Preliminary probe of quality indicators and quality specification in total testing process in 5753 laboratories in China
  17. Analytical and clinical evaluation of the new Fujirebio Lumipulse®G non-competitive assay for 25(OH)-vitamin D and three immunoassays for 25(OH)D in healthy subjects, osteoporotic patients, third trimester pregnant women, healthy African subjects, hemodialyzed and intensive care patients
  18. Patient-performed extraction of faecal calprotectin
  19. Comparison of the clinical utility of the Elia CTD Screen to indirect immunofluorescence on Hep-2 cells
  20. Reference Values and Biological Variations
  21. Sex-related differences in the association of ghrelin levels with obesity in adolescents
  22. Gestation specific reference intervals for thyroid function tests in pregnancy
  23. Cancer Diagnostics
  24. SOX17 promoter methylation in plasma circulating tumor DNA of patients with non-small cell lung cancer
  25. Dopamine concentration in blood platelets is elevated in patients with head and neck paragangliomas
  26. Letters to the Editor
  27. Cancer dynamics and the success of cancer screening programs
  28. Mother’s instinct – a rare case of multiple test interferences due to heterophile antibodies
  29. Sigma metric or defects per million opportunities (DPMO): the performance of clinical laboratories should be evaluated by the Sigma metrics at decimal level with DPMOs
  30. A national survey of preanalytical handling of oral glucose tolerance tests in pregnancy
  31. Updating pregnancy diabetes guidelines: is (y)our laboratory ready?
  32. Low serum bilirubin values are associated with pulmonary embolism in a case-control study
  33. Effect of Hb H on HbA1c measurements as measured by IFCC reference method and affinity HPLC
  34. Adipocytes in venipunctures cause falsely elevated S-100B serum values
  35. Earlier detection of sepsis by Candida parapsilosis using three-dimensional cytographic anomalies on the Mindray BC-6800 hematological analyzer
  36. Theranos phenomenon – part 4: Theranos at an International Conference
Downloaded on 10.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2015-0901/html
Scroll to top button