Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Biochem. 2015 Oct 30;49(3):201–207. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2015.10.019

Table 1.

Performance of the Full versus Simple CSLR Model in Error Prediction. The Average Run Length (ARL) needed to detect test results with either a low or high bias for the full and simple CSLR models. The sensitivity of error detection for each test is shown in parenthesis. Specificity was fixed at 90%. All differences in ARL between the full and simple model were hightly statistically significant (P<0.0001).

Low Bias High Bias
Simple
Model
Full
Model
Simple
Model
Full
Model
Test Error ARL
(Sens)
ARL
(Sens)
ARL
(Sens)
ARL
(Sens)
Na ± 4 mmol/L 27 (100) 13 (100) 42 (94) 10 (100)
K ± 0.5 mmol/L 23 (100) 13 (100) 46 (92) 15 (100)
Cl ± 5% 28 (100) 4 (100) 28 (100) 8 (100)
HCO3* ± 10% 41 (99) 14 (100) 64 (73) 21 (99)
Ca ± 0.25 mmol/L 26 (100) 5 (100) 55 (78) 4 (100)
Alb ± 10% 60 (90) 27 (99) 129 (61) 25 (98)
TP ± 10% 42 (99) 15 (100) 110 (67) 18 (100)
ALP ± 30% 58 (80) 16 (100) 47 (94) 26 (91)
ALT ± 20% 86 (69) 27 (96) 76 (81) 33 (88)
AST ± 20% 66 (77) 19 (100) 62 (89) 25 (96)
TB ± 0.4 mg/dL 36 (98) 19 (100) 31 (100) 20 (100)
Creat ± 0.3 mg/dL 20 (100) 13 (100) 34 (99) 21 (100)
Glu ± 10% 87 (68) 31 (94) 55 (96) 40 (83)
BUN ± 2 mg/dL 49 (87) 37 (86) 63 (72) 40 (84)
  Mean 46 (90) 18 (98) 60 (85) 22 (96)
*

No available CLIA error recommendation.