Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 26;44(5):934–944. doi: 10.1111/ijlh.13907

TABLE 1.

Individual site and composite data for NRR determination

Data set from site No. donors Col/ADP, Col/Epi Col/ADP Col/Epi
Original Manufacturer NRR (PFA‐100 and PFA‐200) 309 62–100 82–150
Current NRRs
A. ICPMR 64–127 94–162
B/C. JHH/RNSH (harmonized; manufacturer) 62–100 82–150
C. RNSH (historical; pre‐harmonization) 73–127 94–162
D/E. RPA/Liverpool (harmonized) 60–120 80–170
E. Liverpool (historical; pre‐harmonization) 73–127 81–146
F. ISLHD 71–125 94–193
Calculated NRRs (− visual outliers; 2.5th–97.5th percentiles)
A. ICPMR 48, 47 75–124 97–157
B/C. JHH/RNSH 46, 46 67–116 92–160
D. RPA 42, 38 65–123 89–151
E. Liverpool 38, 33 65–116 84–168
F. ISLHD 22, 20 69–142 75–181
Composite NSWHP NRR (− visual outliers) 194, 184 69–124 89–160
Composite NSWHP NRR (− statistical outliers a ) 208, 202 67–139 75–194
Composite NSWHP NRR (− statistical outliers b ) 207, 196 67–137 76–181
Composite NSWHP NRR (− visual outliers) (minor rounding). Ranges to be adopted for harmonization 194, 184 70–124 90–160
a

Using the Prism recommended Rout method and selecting 5% as Q. Selecting 10% as Q did not exclude any more outliers; selecting 2% as Q resulted in 1 less outlier for C/Epi.

b

Using the Tukey interquartile range (IQR) method.