2013
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5872
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Change‐point models to estimate the limit of detection

Abstract: In many biological and environmental studies, measured data is subject to a limit of detection. The limit of detection is generally defined as the lowest concentration of analyte that can be differentiated from a blank sample with some certainty. Data falling below the limit of detection is left-censored, falling below a level that is easily quantified by a measuring device. A great deal of interest lies in estimating the limit of detection for a particular measurement device. In this paper we propose a change… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We determined that our HIV RNA PCR assay could detect the difference between 1 copy and ≥10 copies using dilutions of an HIV RNA internal standard [24]. Detectable PCR signal less than 10 copies (1–9 copies) was treated in all analyses as 5 copies.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We determined that our HIV RNA PCR assay could detect the difference between 1 copy and ≥10 copies using dilutions of an HIV RNA internal standard [24]. Detectable PCR signal less than 10 copies (1–9 copies) was treated in all analyses as 5 copies.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When working with concentration values a decision is made on how to set the appropriate level-of-detection (LOD) for each analyte25. However, the inverse procedure of going from fluorescence to concentration, via the inverse 5PL curve, also has limits (top/bottom), beyond which no concentration values can be obtained.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This assumption may not be strictly true for the observed fluorescence responses for a given platform; as automatic calibration steps during setup yields a highly reproducible signal output even across different instruments 23 . Recently, we have argued that for statistical differential analysis and for reproducibility fluorescence values are the better choice and they alleviate the concern of determining levels of detection 15 17 22 24 25 . It this report a xMAP suspension bead-based immunoassay format is used to demonstrate fluorescence based data analysis, however the methodological techniques used here are generic and applicable to other immunoassay platforms that use typical sigmoidal/ logistic concentration curves to map fluorescence to concentration values.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such out-of-range values in concentration-based analysis are frequently imputed by maximum likelihood estimations, extrapolation or substitution thereby increasing the risk of obtaining inaccurate estimations and false conclusions 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 . Several studies have shown that fluorescence values do not have out-of-range problems, and that fluorescence-based analysis has higher statistical power than concentration-based analysis, is a better choice for statistical differential analyses and reproducibility, and that background correction is not required [ 28 , 33 , 35 , 36 ]. The use of fluorescence intensity values for our discriminant analysis is relatively novel.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%