Build an evidence map before an uncertainty budget

MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY

Build an evidence map before an uncertainty budget

Distinguish a source of uncertainty from the data used to estimate it.

Revised 30 September 2026. The original publication date and address are retained.

Map effects to evidence

Effect or questionPotential evidence
Routine analytical variationRepresentative IQC or precision-study observations
Assigned calibration valueRelevant certificate and traceability information
Lot or instrument differencesLot-acceptance and paired comparison studies
Bias or correctionSuitable reference materials or comparison procedures
Patient-material behaviourRelevant specimen studies and material-suitability evidence
Resolution or roundingReporting rules and an appropriate distribution model

A dataset is not automatically a contribution

IQC, EQA and verification are evidence sources. Traceability is a property of a result, and propagation is a calculation process. Do not treat every heading on a checklist as a separate number to add to a budget.

Prevent double counting

If long-term IQC already spans routine reagent-lot changes, a separate lot-variation term may overlap with it. Identify exactly what each dataset covers, where coverage is incomplete, and which additional term the model genuinely needs.

Existing data can be enough—but not by assumption

Reuse well-characterised data where it answers the question. A short verification, a detection limit or a manufacturer acceptance range is not automatically a standard uncertainty for routine patient results. Additional evidence may be necessary when current data do not cover the intended concentration, specimen or operating conditions.

Use judgement transparently

Type B evaluations may draw on certificates, specifications, prior information and justified scientific judgement. Record the evidence, distribution and limitations. Expert familiarity helps define the model; it does not make an unsupported number equivalent to a measured performance estimate.

The minimum useful record

  • Define the effect and the result to which it applies.
  • Name the evidence and its period or version.
  • Explain how the standard uncertainty is obtained.
  • Record overlap, correlation, exclusions and missing evidence.
  • Set a review trigger for provisional assumptions.

Discover more from Pathology Uncertainty

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Pathology Uncertainty

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading