Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A simplified approach to the estimation of analytical measurement uncertainty

  • General Paper
  • Published:
Accreditation and Quality Assurance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study summarizes the measurement uncertainty estimations carried out in Nestlé Research Center since 2002. These estimations cover a wide range of analyses of commercial and regulatory interests. In a first part, this study shows that method validation data (repeatability, trueness and intermediate reproducibility) can be used to provide a good estimation of measurement uncertainty.

In a second part, measurement uncertainty is compared to collaborative trials data. These data can be used for measurement uncertainty estimation as far as the in-house validation performances are comparable to the method validation performances obtained in the collaborative trial.

Based on these two main observations, the aim of this study is to easily estimate the measurement uncertainty using validation data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Eurachem/CITAC. Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement. QUAM:2000.P1. 2000

  2. ISO. Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. Geneva, Switzerland. 1993

  3. EUROLAB. Measurement uncertainty in testing. Technical Report No 1/2002. 2004

  4. Ellison SLR, Barwick VJ (1998) Using validation data for ISO measurement uncertainty estimation. Part 1. Principles of an approach using cause and effect analysis. The Analyst 123:1387–1392.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ellison SLR, Barwick VJ (1998) Estimating measurement uncertainty reconciliation using a cause and effect approach. Accred Qual Assur 3:101–105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Barwick VJ, Ellison SLR (2000) The evaluation of measurement uncertainty from method validation studies. Part 1: Description of a laboratory protocol. Accred Qual Assur 5:47–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barwick VJ, Ellison SLR, Rafferty MJQ, Gill RS (2000) The evaluation of measurement uncertainty from method validation studies. Part 2: The practical application of a laboratory protocol. Accred Qual Assur 5:104–113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Barwick VJ, Ellison SLR (1998) Estimating measurement uncertainty using a cause and effect and reconciliation approach. Part 2: Measurement uncertainty estimates compared with collaborative trial expectation. Anal Commun 35:377–383

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hund E, Massart DL, Smeyers-Verbeke J (2003) Comparison of different approaches to estimate the uncertainty of a liquid chromatographic assay. Analytica Chimica Acta 480:39–52

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Armishaw P (2003) Estimating measurement uncertainty in an afternoon. A case study in the practical application of measurement uncertainty. Accred Qual Assur 8:218–224

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Haesselbarth W (2004) Accounting for bias in measurement uncertainty. Accred Qual Assur 9:509–514.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ellison SLR (1998) ISO uncertainty and collaborative trial data. Accred Qual Assur 3:95–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Adriaan MH, van der Veen A, Broos JM, Alink A (1998) Relationship between performance characteristics obtained from an interlaboratory study programme and combined measurement uncertainty: a case study. Accred Qual Assur 3:462–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Guidance for the use of repeatability, reproducibility and trueness estimates in measurement uncertainty estimation. ISO/TS21748:2004

  15. Stöber P, Giller V, Spack L, Prodolliet J (2004) Measurement uncertainty of the HPAE Chromatographic Determination of Instant Coffee Carbohydrates. J AOAC Int 87:647–656

    Google Scholar 

  16. Campos Giménez E, Bénet T, and Spack L. The uncertainty of the calculation of blocked and reactive lysine in milk products, as determined by the furosine method. Accred Qual Assur (2004) 9:605–614

  17. Campos Giménez E, Spack L, Meyer L, Perrin C (2004) Acheson-Shalom, R. Measurement uncertainty of the caffeine determination in soluble coffee by HPLC. Mitteilungen aus Lebensmitteluntersuchung und Hygiene 95:240–250

    Google Scholar 

  18. Spack L, Royer D, Campos Giménez E, Acheson-Shalom R, Stadler R (2004) Measurement uncertainty of chloramphenicol in food products by LC-MS/MS. Mitteilungen aus Lebensmitteluntersuchung und Hygiene 95:223–239

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rousseuw PJ, Croux C (1993) Alternatives to the Median Absolute Deviation. J Amer Statistical Assoc 88, 1273–1283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Royal Society of Chemistry, Is my uncertainty estimate realistic?. AMC Technical Brief 15, 2003

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nestlé Research Center, Vers-chez-les-blanc, CH-1000, Lausanne, 26, Switzerland

    Sébastien Populaire & Esther Campos Giménez

Authors
  1. Sébastien Populaire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Esther Campos Giménez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sébastien Populaire.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Populaire, S., Giménez, E.C. A simplified approach to the estimation of analytical measurement uncertainty. Accred Qual Assur 10, 485–493 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-005-0036-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-005-0036-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation