R_Peterson_12 wrote:
Thanks again for thinking about this.
So I did the first formula for the reportable peak, and then I just did the average in the report method to see what would happen instead of doing the intersample calculation (I figured the two would probably amount to the same thing). It ended up returning -30003.97 (the average of 0.06 and -60009).
I suspected this might happen- when there are two data types outputted from the same CF, for example Text and Numbers, Empower cant seem to only select the numbers part to add up and just ignore the text. Its the same reason you cant add up values from an ENUM CF set to use as field if the non-field translation is a text string. Quite annoying from a reporting point of view.
R_Peterson_12 wrote:
So here's my current plan. I'd appreciate it if you could look it over and see if it's doable.
I have an enum for the peaks that puts it into categories called Type_of_peak, ND, <LOQ, and >LOQ. It would return position. (The way I think that works is that it would show the text in a summary table, but in future custom fields it would Type_of_peak as its position, 0, 1, or 2. Is that right?)
How is this CF written though, in terms of formula and what is the use as set to? Is use as text then yes this will be displayed in a report but what criteria are you using to ask Empower to identify peaks? Is it along the lines of ENUM(EQ(Peak Type,"Missing"),LT(Amount,LOQ),GTE(Amount, LOQ))?
R_Peterson_12 wrote:
Then, if I could find a way to compare the duplicate reps, I could use an enum for my intersample calculation. Something like:
ENUM(EQ(SAME.%.(Type_of_peak), 0), EQ(SAME.%.(Type_of_peak), 1), EQ(SAME.%.(Type_of_peak), 2))
The returned values of those would be ND, <LOQ, SAME.%..AVE(Result).
This wont work as you are thinking. Empower would scan the CF from left to right for a matching condition and it will knock each situation off the list. The first translation you are asking for is that, for all samples where the label is the same, every single value for "Type_of_Peak" is 0. If not, move on. The second translation is only true when every single value for Type_Of_Peak is 1 in samples labelled the same and 2 for the third condition. This makes no sense because such conditions will not exist and even if they did, it wouldn't return the output you desire to label your peaks.
So although a peak enum CF to identify where exactly a peak lies in relation to being NA less than LOQ Missing etc would work ok, it wont work in subsequent calculations. Is there no leeway on the method insofar as you don't have to only report the final value if one of the values is a category above the other? Can you post an excel spreadsheet of these results to get a better feel for what exactly you are looking for?
R_Peterson_12 wrote:
My other thought is that I could label the results A and B, then insert a line between every pair of results in the sample set and use "Summarize Custom Fields Incrementally." That would allow me to compare the results separately in my intersample calculation.
The problem with that solution is that I'm not sure how summarize custom fields incrementally works. If it works the way I hope, it would compare the results in between lines, then erase that value and compare results between the next set of lines. My worry is that it would actually continuously add the results together, making more of a rolling average instead.
Summarize Custom Fields incrementally will calculate the results for summary custom fields ABOVE all lines where the function is inserted but BELOW the previous summarize custom field line, so if you ran a standard 10 times throughout the run and wanted Empower to capture the %RSD for each injection then stick a SCFI fuction just below the first standard and again just below the second standard and third and so on such that each stage will give a different result and the final result will give the same %RSD as if you had just used Summarize Custom Fields on its own.
Unfortunately this wont work with the labels, so if you have more than 1 instance of A or B and you call for a summary such that A.%..AVE(Area), Empower will ignore all the SCFI lines and proceed to average the values for ALL samples in the sample set labelled as A and not just the ones between SCFI functions!
I think if you send on a spreadsheet of your final results report it would help matters.