The relationship between measurement uncertainty and reporting interval

Tony Badrick*, Robert C. Hawkins

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)
121 Downloads (Pure)


Methods and results: The reporting interval R is the smallest unit of measurement chosen for clinical reporting. When choosing the appropriate value for R, it is necessary that the reference change values and expanded MU values can be meaningfully calculated. Expanded MU provides the tighter criterion for defining an upper limit for R. This limit can be determined as R≤k.SDa/1.9, where SDa is the analytical standard deviation and k is the coverage factor (usually 2).

Conclusion: Using MU estimates to determine the reporting interval for quantitative laboratory results ensures that reporting practices match local analytical performance and recognizes the inherent error of the measurement process.

Background: Measurement uncertainty (MU) estimates can be used by clinicians in result interpretation for diagnosis and monitoring and by laboratories in assessing assay fitness for use and analytical troubleshooting. However, MU is not routinely used to assess the appropriateness of the analyte reporting interval.We describe the relationship between MU and the analyte reporting interval.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)177-179
Number of pages3
JournalAnnals of Clinical Biochemistry
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 19 Jan 2015


Dive into the research topics of 'The relationship between measurement uncertainty and reporting interval'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this