TABLE 2.
Summary of normal reference range (NRR) data from current report a
| IL dRVVT S neat | IL dRVVT C neat | IL dRVVT S mix | IL dRVVT C mix | IL dRVVT S ratio | IL dRVVT S mix ratio | IL dRVVT S/C NR | IL dRVVT S/C mix NR | APTTLS (sec) | APTTLR (sec) | APTTLS mix (sec) | APTTLR mix (sec) | APTT NR | APTT mix NR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of values | 122 | 122 | 122 | 120 | 122 | 122 | 122 | 120 | 120 | 121 | 120 | 121 | 120 | 121 |
| Pass normality tests? | Some (2/4) | Yes (4/4) | Some (2/4) | Yes (4/4) | Some (2/4) | Yes (4/4) | No (0/4) | Yes (4/4) | No (1/4) | Yes (4/4) | No (0/4) | Yes (4/4) | Some (2/4) | No (0/4) |
| Median | 32.1 | 28.2 | 33.6 | 30.0 | 0.90 | 0.94 | 1.06 | 1.04 | 33.2 | 26.9 | 32.3 | 27.2 | 1.05 | 1.01 |
| 2.5th −97.5th Percentile | 23.9–42.2 | 24.2–31.8 | 27.6–38.4 | 27.3–32.9 | 0.88–1.37 | 0.89–1.20 | 0.64–1.30 | 0.74–1.13 | 27.5–40.6 | 22.2–33.3 | 28.6–36.2 | 24.1–31.0 | 0.90–1.18 | 0.90–1.11 |
| 99th Percentile | 44.4 | 33.4 | 39.0 | 33.2 | 1.47 | 1.22 | 1.31 | 1.15 | 42.7 | 34.5 | 38.5 | 31.2 | 1.36 | 1.25 |
| Mean | 32.7 | 28.1 | 33.5 | 30.0 | 0.92 | 0.94 | 1.07 | 1.04 | 33.1 | 27.0 | 32.2 | 27.2 | 1.05 | 1.01 |
| Range ±2 SD | 23.2–42.2 | 24.0–32.1 | 28.3–38.7 | 27.4–32.5 | 0.61–1.23 | 0.76–1.13 | 0.83–1.32 | 0.90–1.17 | 26.9–39.3 | 21.9–32.2 | 28.6–35.9 | 24.2–30.1 | 0.90–1.20 | 0.90–1.11 |
| Range ±3 SD | 18.5–47.0 | 22.0–34.2 | 25.7–41.3 | 26.1–33.8 | 0.46–1.38 | 0.66–1.22 | 0.71–1.44 | 0.83–1.24 | 23.8–42.4 | 19.3–34.8 | 26.8–37.7 | 22.7–31.6 | 0.82–1.27 | 0.85–1.17 |
dRVVT S/C NR, dRVVT screen/confirm normalized ratio; dRVVT S/C mix NR, dRVVT mix screen/confirm normalized ratio (mix = 1:1 patient plasma:normal pool plasma). Data generated using data shown in Figure 3. No outliers were removed to create these ranges, which are primarily shown to identify the variation in ranges according to method used. Only few “outlier” data points (shown with red symbols in Figure 3) would be removed in first round by visual inspection, and thus such removal would not likely change ranges drastically. Of the statistical methods used, we would personally favor the 2.5th–97.5th ranges (bold text) as providing the most robust utility, given normal data was generally not normally distributed.