Accreditation and Quality Assurance

, Volume 11, Issue 10, pp 536–538 | Cite as

On the calculation of decision limits in doping control

Letter to the Editor

References

  1. 1.
    van der Veen AMH (2003) Accred Qual Assur 8:334–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Eenoo P, Delbeke FT (2003) Accred Qual Assur 8:477–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Currie LA (1968) Anal Chem 40:586–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Currie LA (1995) Pure Appl Chem 67:1699–1723Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Currie LA (1997) Chemom Intell Lab Syst 37:151–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Olivieri AC, Faber NM, Ferré J, Boqué R, Kalivas JH, Mark H (2006) Pure Appl Chem 78:633–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    King B (2004) Accred Qual Assur 9:369–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    European Commission (2002) Council Decision of 12 August 2002, implementing Council Directive 96/23/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and interpretation of results, 2002/657/EC, Official Journal of the European Communities, L221/8 EN, 17.08.2002Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    World Anti-Doping Agency WADA (2002) Laboratory accreditation requirements and operating standards, Version 1.0, 10 November 2002. WADA: http://www.wada-ama.org/Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) G8 (1996) Guidelines on the assessment and reporting of compliance with specification. ILAC: http://www.ilac.org/Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO/DIS 10576–1 (2000) Statistical methods – guidelines for the evaluation of conformity with specified requirements. Part 1. General principles. ISO, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Lancet 327:307–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemometry ConsultancyEdeThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Analytical Chemistry and Organic ChemistryRovira i Virgili UniversityTarragonaSpain

Personalised recommendations