Date of this Version


Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Details

Submitted version

Badrick, T., & Hawkins, R.C. (2015). The relationship between measurement uncertainty and reporting interval. Annals of Clinical Biochemistry, 52(1), 177-179.

Access the journal

© Copyright, The Authors, 2014

Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications.

Distribution License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.





Measurement uncertainty (MU) estimates can be used by clinicians in result interpretation for diagnosis and monitoring and by laboratories in assessing assay fitness for use and analytical troubleshooting. However, MU is not routinely used to assess the appropriateness of the analyte reporting interval.We describe the relationship between MU and the analyte reporting interval.

Methods and results:

The reporting interval R is the smallest unit of measurement chosen for clinical reporting. When choosing the appropriate value for R, it is necessary that the reference change values and expanded MU values can be meaningfully calculated. Expanded MU provides the tighter criterion for defining an upper limit for R. This limit can be determined as R4k SDa/1.9, where SDa is the analytical standard deviation and k is the coverage factor (usually 2).


Using MU estimates to determine the reporting interval for quantitative laboratory results ensures that reporting practices match local analytical performance and recognizes the inherent error of the measurement process.



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.