ABSTRACT
The current push for rigor and reproducibility is driven by a desire for confidence in research results. Here, we suggest a framework for a systematic process, based on consensus principles of measurement science, to guide researchers and reviewers in assessing, documenting, and mitigating the sources of uncertainty in a study. All study results have associated ambiguities that are not always clarified by simply establishing reproducibility. By explicitly considering sources of uncertainty, noting aspects of the experimental system that are difficult to characterize quantitatively, and proposing alternative interpretations, the researcher provides information that enhances comparability and reproducibility.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/statistics & numerical data , Data Accuracy , Research Design/statistics & numerical data , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , UncertaintyABSTRACT
Assay variability has been cited as an obstacle to establishing optimal vitamin D exposure. As part of the Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) effort to standardize the measurement of total 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D], the value assignment of total 25(OH)D in 50 single-donor serum samples was performed using two isotope-dilution LC with tandem MS methods. Both methods are recognized as reference measurement procedures (RMPs) by the Joint Committee for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine. These samples and their assigned values serve as the foundation for several aspects of the VDSP. To our knowledge, this is the first time that two RMPs have been used to assign 25(OH)D values to such a large number of serum samples.