The Experts below are selected from a list of 32037 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
G T Maine - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
evaluation of a next generation direct whole blood enzymatic assay for hemoglobin a1c on the architect c8000 chemistry system
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Tracy Teodoromorrison, Marcel J W Janssen, Jasper Mols, Ben H E Hendrickx, Mathieu H Velmans, Johannes Lotz, Karl J Lackner, Lieselotte Lennartz, David A Armbruster, G T MaineAbstract:BACKGROUND The utility of HbA1c for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes requires an accurate, precise and robust test measurement system. Currently, immunoassay and HPLC are the most popular methods for HbA1c quantification, noting however the limitations associated with some platforms, such as Imprecision or interference from common hemoglobin variants. Abbott Diagnostics has introduced a fully automated direct enzymatic method for the quantification of HbA1c from whole blood on the ARCHITECT chemistry system. METHODS Here we completed a method evaluation of the ARCHITECT HbA1c enzymatic assay for Imprecision, accuracy, method comparison, interference from hemoglobin variants and specimen stability. This was completed at three independent clinical laboratories in North America and Europe. RESULTS The total Imprecision ranged from 0.5% to 2.2% CV with low and high level control materials. Around the diagnostic cut-off of 48 mmol/mol, the total Imprecision was 0.6% CV. Mean bias using reference samples from IFCC and CAP ranged from -1.1 to 1.0 mmol/mol. The enzymatic assay also showed excellent agreement with HPLC methods, with slopes of 1.01 and correlation coefficients ranging from 0.984 to 0.996 compared to Menarini Adams HA-8160, Bio-Rad Variant II and Variant II Turbo instruments. Finally, no significant effect was observed for erythrocyte sedimentation or interference from common hemoglobin variants in patient samples containing heterozygous HbS, HbC, HbD, HbE, and up to 10% HbF. CONCLUSIONS The ARCHITECT enzymatic assay for HbA1c is a robust and fully automated method that meets the performance requirements to support the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.
-
evaluation of a next generation direct whole blood enzymatic assay for hemoglobin a1c on the architect c8000 chemistry system
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Tracy Teodoromorrison, Marcel J W Janssen, Jasper Mols, Ben H E Hendrickx, Mathieu H Velmans, Johannes Lotz, Karl J Lackner, Lieselotte Lennartz, David A Armbruster, G T MaineAbstract:The utility of HbA1c for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes requires an accurate, precise and robust test measurement system. Currently, immunoassay and HPLC are the most popular methods for HbA1c quantification, noting however the limitations associated with some platforms, such as Imprecision or interference from common hemoglobin variants. Abbott Diagnostics has introduced a fully automated direct enzymatic method for the quantification of HbA1c from whole blood on the ARCHITECT chemistry system.Here we completed a method evaluation of the ARCHITECT HbA1c enzymatic assay for Imprecision, accuracy, method comparison, interference from hemoglobin variants and specimen stability. This was completed at three independent clinical laboratories in North America and Europe.The total Imprecision ranged from 0.5% to 2.2% CV with low and high level control materials. Around the diagnostic cut-off of 48 mmol/mol, the total Imprecision was 0.6% CV. Mean bias using reference samples from IFCC and CAP ranged from -1.1 to 1.0 mmol/mol. The enzymatic assay also showed excellent agreement with HPLC methods, with slopes of 1.01 and correlation coefficients ranging from 0.984 to 0.996 compared to Menarini Adams HA-8160, Bio-Rad Variant II and Variant II Turbo instruments. Finally, no significant effect was observed for erythrocyte sedimentation or interference from common hemoglobin variants in patient samples containing heterozygous HbS, HbC, HbD, HbE, and up to 10% HbF.The ARCHITECT enzymatic assay for HbA1c is a robust and fully automated method that meets the performance requirements to support the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.
Melissa Bateson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Time perception and patience: individual differences in interval timing precision predict choice impulsivity in European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris
Animal Cognition, 2021Co-Authors: Clare Andrews, Jonathon Dunn, Daniel Nettle, Melissa BatesonAbstract:Impulsivity, in the sense of the extent rewards are devalued as the time until their realization increases, is linked to various negative outcomes in humans, yet understanding of the cognitive mechanisms underlying it is limited. Variation in the Imprecision of interval timing is a possible contributor to variation in impulsivity. We use a numerical model to generate predictions concerning the effect of timing Imprecision on impulsivity. We distinguish between fixed Imprecision (the Imprecision that applies even when timing the very shortest time intervals) and proportional Imprecision (the rate at which Imprecision increases as the interval becomes longer). The model predicts that impulsivity should increase with increasing fixed Imprecision, but decrease with increasing proportional Imprecision. We present data from a cohort of European starlings ( Sturnus vulgaris , n = 28) in which impulsivity had previously been measured through an intertemporal choice paradigm. We tested interval timing Imprecision in the same individuals using a tri-peak temporal reproduction procedure. We found repeatable individual differences in both fixed and proportional Imprecision. As predicted, birds with greater proportional Imprecision in interval timing made fewer impulsive choices, whilst those with greater fixed Imprecision tended to make more. Contradictory observations in the literature regarding the direction of association between timing Imprecision and impulsivity might be clarified by distinguishing between fixed and proportional components of Imprecision.
Tracy Teodoromorrison - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
evaluation of a next generation direct whole blood enzymatic assay for hemoglobin a1c on the architect c8000 chemistry system
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Tracy Teodoromorrison, Marcel J W Janssen, Jasper Mols, Ben H E Hendrickx, Mathieu H Velmans, Johannes Lotz, Karl J Lackner, Lieselotte Lennartz, David A Armbruster, G T MaineAbstract:BACKGROUND The utility of HbA1c for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes requires an accurate, precise and robust test measurement system. Currently, immunoassay and HPLC are the most popular methods for HbA1c quantification, noting however the limitations associated with some platforms, such as Imprecision or interference from common hemoglobin variants. Abbott Diagnostics has introduced a fully automated direct enzymatic method for the quantification of HbA1c from whole blood on the ARCHITECT chemistry system. METHODS Here we completed a method evaluation of the ARCHITECT HbA1c enzymatic assay for Imprecision, accuracy, method comparison, interference from hemoglobin variants and specimen stability. This was completed at three independent clinical laboratories in North America and Europe. RESULTS The total Imprecision ranged from 0.5% to 2.2% CV with low and high level control materials. Around the diagnostic cut-off of 48 mmol/mol, the total Imprecision was 0.6% CV. Mean bias using reference samples from IFCC and CAP ranged from -1.1 to 1.0 mmol/mol. The enzymatic assay also showed excellent agreement with HPLC methods, with slopes of 1.01 and correlation coefficients ranging from 0.984 to 0.996 compared to Menarini Adams HA-8160, Bio-Rad Variant II and Variant II Turbo instruments. Finally, no significant effect was observed for erythrocyte sedimentation or interference from common hemoglobin variants in patient samples containing heterozygous HbS, HbC, HbD, HbE, and up to 10% HbF. CONCLUSIONS The ARCHITECT enzymatic assay for HbA1c is a robust and fully automated method that meets the performance requirements to support the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.
-
evaluation of a next generation direct whole blood enzymatic assay for hemoglobin a1c on the architect c8000 chemistry system
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Tracy Teodoromorrison, Marcel J W Janssen, Jasper Mols, Ben H E Hendrickx, Mathieu H Velmans, Johannes Lotz, Karl J Lackner, Lieselotte Lennartz, David A Armbruster, G T MaineAbstract:The utility of HbA1c for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes requires an accurate, precise and robust test measurement system. Currently, immunoassay and HPLC are the most popular methods for HbA1c quantification, noting however the limitations associated with some platforms, such as Imprecision or interference from common hemoglobin variants. Abbott Diagnostics has introduced a fully automated direct enzymatic method for the quantification of HbA1c from whole blood on the ARCHITECT chemistry system.Here we completed a method evaluation of the ARCHITECT HbA1c enzymatic assay for Imprecision, accuracy, method comparison, interference from hemoglobin variants and specimen stability. This was completed at three independent clinical laboratories in North America and Europe.The total Imprecision ranged from 0.5% to 2.2% CV with low and high level control materials. Around the diagnostic cut-off of 48 mmol/mol, the total Imprecision was 0.6% CV. Mean bias using reference samples from IFCC and CAP ranged from -1.1 to 1.0 mmol/mol. The enzymatic assay also showed excellent agreement with HPLC methods, with slopes of 1.01 and correlation coefficients ranging from 0.984 to 0.996 compared to Menarini Adams HA-8160, Bio-Rad Variant II and Variant II Turbo instruments. Finally, no significant effect was observed for erythrocyte sedimentation or interference from common hemoglobin variants in patient samples containing heterozygous HbS, HbC, HbD, HbE, and up to 10% HbF.The ARCHITECT enzymatic assay for HbA1c is a robust and fully automated method that meets the performance requirements to support the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.
Andrew E. Spero - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Imprecision in Accounting Measurement: Can It Be Value Enhancing?
Journal of Accounting Research, 2005Co-Authors: Chandra Kanodia, Rajdeep Singh, Andrew E. SperoAbstract:Accounting measurements of firms' investments are usually imprecise. We study the economic consequences of such Imprecision when it interacts with information asymmetry regarding an investment project's ex ante profitability, known only by the firm's managers. Absent agency and risk-sharing considerations, we find that some degree of accounting Imprecision could actually be value enhancing. We characterize the optimal degree of Imprecision and identify its key determinants. The greater the information asymmetry regarding the project's profitability, the greater is the Imprecision that should be tolerated in the measurement of the firm's investment.
-
Imprecision in Accounting Measurement: Can It Be Value Enhancing?
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2001Co-Authors: Chandra Kanodia, Rajdeep Singh, Andrew E. SperoAbstract:Accounting measurements of firms' investments are usually imprecise. We study the economic consequences of such Imprecision in a setting where accounting Imprecision interacts with information asymmetry regarding the ex ante profitability of the project that is privately known by the firm's managers. Absent agency and risk sharing considerations, we find that some degree of accounting Imprecision could actually be value enhancing. We characterize the optimal degree of Imprecision and identify its key determinants. The greater the information asymmetry about the project's profitability, the greater is the Imprecision that should be tolerated in the measurement of the firm's investment.
Michael Gibas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
evaluating the Imprecision of static analysis
Workshop on Program Analysis For Software Tools and Engineering, 2004Co-Authors: Atanas Rountev, Scott Kagan, Michael GibasAbstract:This work discusses two non-traditional approaches for evaluating the Imprecision of static analysis. The approaches are based on proofs of feasibility or infeasibility that are constructed manually by the experimenters. We also describe our initial experience with these techniques.
