Measure of fitness for calibration curves

Discussions about chromatography data systems, LIMS, controllers, computer issues and related topics.

5 posts Page 1 of 1
After we built a curve, there are multiple ways to check how well it fits the data:
- - this one seems to be popular, but I've also heard complaints that it's not the best indicator
- Residuals - this one will highlight the trends of curving the data around the fitted line, but it's a visual inspection. How acceptable are visual inspections in the lab, and how acceptable are they for the regulators?

Are there other statistics that you'd recommend looking into?
Software Engineer at elsci.io (my contact: stanislav.bashkyrtsev@elsci.io)
We use a very simple method: Back calculation of the data. If each measured data point fits it's nominal concentration by > x % (x is dependent of the intended use of the calibration), it is acceptable. If the percent deviation is too large, the standard is rejected (if it is clearly an outlier) or the curve is rejected.
I will point out that the US EPA drinking water methods for PFAS 537.1 and 533 both use residual criteria and don't include a criterion for coefficient of determination.
So does the SANTE/12830/2020 pesticide guideline:
The suitability of the chosen function should be demonstrated. Preferably, this should be accomplished by a residual analysis using the residuals, rather than reporting the coefficient of correlation (r) or determination (R2). [...] The regression residuals should be presented in a residual plot. Visual inspection should be applied to decide if di are randomly distributed and hence linear calibration is demonstrated. If a trend is visible in the residuals, the calibration model is not suitable and an alternative approach must be used (e.g. alternative calibration function, different/split calibration range).
Thanks! So residuals it is. I'm concerned though that this "visual inspection" is a bit subjective:
SANTE/12830/2020 wrote:
Visual inspection should be applied to decide if di are randomly distributed and hence linear calibration is demonstrated.
You can always say that the data seemed to be random and you didn't notice patterns. Calculating the SD of residuals is more objective:
bunnahabhain wrote:
If the percent deviation is too large, the standard is rejected (if it is clearly an outlier) or the curve is rejected.
Software Engineer at elsci.io (my contact: stanislav.bashkyrtsev@elsci.io)
5 posts Page 1 of 1

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 1117 on Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

Latest Blog Posts from Separation Science

Separation Science offers free learning from the experts covering methods, applications, webinars, eSeminars, videos, tutorials for users of liquid chromatography, gas chromatography, mass spectrometry, sample preparation and related analytical techniques.

Subscribe to our eNewsletter with daily, weekly or monthly updates: Food & Beverage, Environmental, (Bio)Pharmaceutical, Bioclinical, Liquid Chromatography, Gas Chromatography and Mass Spectrometry.

Liquid Chromatography

Gas Chromatography

Mass Spectrometry