Inaccuracy, precision acc. to IUPAC [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2023-06-30 13:33 (293 d 20:40 ago) – Posting: # 23637
Views: 1,611

Hi Avinash,

not answering you question but a general comment. IMHO, the confusion in terminology (also in other bioanalytical guidelines) is probably caused by only a few analytical chemists (for ICH M10 just one?) involved.*

Accuracy is qualitative. We want that our result have small inaccuracy (which is quantitative). The ±15% (±20% at the LLOQ) ‘accuracy‘ stated in the guideline(s) is sloppy terminology. SCNR. I’m fine with 85–115% (80–120% at the LLOQ) of the true value or, if you prefer, ±15% (±20% at the LLOQ) inaccuracy. The term ‘non-accuracy’ is an invention of ICH.

The proper terms are unambiguously defined by the ‘International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry’ (founded 1919!) in its ‘Golden Book’:


Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,987 posts in 4,824 threads, 1,663 registered users;
81 visitors (0 registered, 81 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 10:14 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity
is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity.    Voltaire

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5