Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Repeatability, Reproducibility and Representativeness / Journal articles

Journal articles on the topic 'Repeatability, Reproducibility and Representativeness'

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Repeatability, Reproducibility and Representativeness.

Author: Grafiati

Published: 10 December 2022

Last updated: 28 January 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Repeatability, Reproducibility and Representativeness.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Aboulela, Amr, Matthieu Peyre Lavigne, Amaury Buvignier, Marlène Fourré, Maud Schiettekatte, Tony Pons, Cédric Patapy, et al. "Laboratory Test to Evaluate the Resistance of Cementitious Materials to Biodeterioration in Sewer Network Conditions." Materials 14, no. 3 (February 2, 2021): 686. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14030686.

Full text

Abstract:

The biodeterioration of cementitious materials in sewer networks has become a major economic, ecological, and public health issue. Establishing a suitable standardized test is essential if sustainable construction materials are to be developed and qualified for sewerage environments. Since purely chemical tests are proven to not be representative of the actual deterioration phenomena in real sewer conditions, a biological test–named the Biogenic Acid Concrete (BAC) test–was developed at the University of Toulouse to reproduce the biological reactions involved in the process of concrete biodeterioration in sewers. The test consists in trickling a solution containing a safe reduced sulfur source onto the surface of cementitious substrates previously covered with a high diversity microbial consortium. In these conditions, a sulfur-oxidizing metabolism naturally develops in the biofilm and leads to the production of biogenic sulfuric acid on the surface of the material. The representativeness of the test in terms of deterioration mechanisms has been validated in previous studies. A wide range of cementitious materials have been exposed to the biodeterioration test during half a decade. On the basis of this large database and the expertise gained, the purpose of this paper is (i) to propose a simple and robust performance criterion for the test (standardized leached calcium as a function of sulfate produced by the biofilm), and (ii) to demonstrate the repeatability, reproducibility, and discriminability of the test method. In only a 3-month period, the test was able to highlight the differences in the performances of common cement-based materials (CEM I, CEM III, and CEM V) and special calcium aluminate cement (CAC) binders with different nature of aggregates (natural silica and synthetic calcium aluminate). The proposed performance indicator (relative standardized leached calcium) allowed the materials to be classified according to their resistance to biogenic acid attack in sewer conditions. The repeatability of the test was confirmed using three different specimens of the same material within the same experiment and the reproducibility of the results was demonstrated by standardizing the results using a reference material from 5 different test campaigns. Furthermore, developing post-testing processing and calculation methods constituted a first step toward a standardized test protocol.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Zhaivoronok, Ihor, and Yurii Kovalenko. "INCREASING THE ACCURACY OF DETERMINING THE WORKING PARAMETERS OF THE RIBBON-SHAPED ELECTRONIC FLOW IN THE ELECTRON-BEAM MICRO-PROCESSING OF DIELECTRICS." Bulletin of Kyiv Polytechnic Institute. Series Instrument Making, no. 64(2) (December 24, 2022): 33–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.20535/1970.64(2).2022.269983.

Full text

Abstract:

The article shows the possibility of increasing the accuracy of determining the operating parameters of the ribbon-shaped electron flow during electron beam micromachining of dielectric materials in a vacuum (using the example of Kp0 grade polycrystalline silicon and K8 grade optical glass) as a result of the analysis and selection of the most acceptable energy modes of operation of the Pierce wire electron-beam gun. The purpose of the work is to study the influence of the volt-current characteristics of the Pierce wire electron-beam gun on the quality and repeatability of the process of processing dielectric materials with a ribbon-shaped electron flow, which allows choosing the most rational modes of determining the operating parameters of the electron flow with higher accuracy. The paper proposes a technological experiment on electron-beam micromachining of dielectric surfaces, as well as defined and investigated the working parameters of the process of such processing, depending on the possible energy characteristics of the main working node of the electron-beam equipment, namely, the Pierce electron-beam gun. The operating parameters of the ribbon-shaped electron flow obtained as a result of the experimental study made it possible to ensure the highest quality processing of the surfaces of dielectric materials due to the improvement of such indicators of the accuracy of determining these parameters as precision (for example, the standard deviation of the repeatability of Sr decreased from 8.33% to 4.95%, and the standard the SR reproducibility deviation decreased from 13.28% to 6.18%), which confirms the representativeness of the working parameters, as well as the correctness (the bias of the method of determining the working parameters in the electronic flow is statistically insignificant under the conditions of the confidence interval on the axis d = 0 at the significance level a = 0.05). The analysis of the obtained results regarding the electron-beam microprocessing of the surfaces of dielectric materials according to the selected operating parameters proves the improvement of quality and the increase in the reproducibility of the results of the processing of these surfaces in terms of purity, as well as the reduction of the residual nanorelief by 18-25%. A comparison of the results of experimental electron-beam microprocessing of dielectrics with the results of their laser surface treatment made it possible to establish a reduction in residual micro-uniformities of the surface, as in electron-beam microprocessing (for optical glass K8 by 17-27 times; for silicon Kp0 - by 14-22 times) , as well as during surface laser treatment (for both types of material – 12-14 times). At the same time, surface laser treatment does not allow to eliminate surface waviness, which is related to the specifics of the interaction of the laser beam with the surface of the optical material, while when processing with an electron flow of the ribbon form, the occurrence of such waviness is not observed. The conclusions and analyzed data obtained in the article based on the results of experimental research can be used to optimize the technological regimes of electron-beam micromachining in the production of products of microoptics, integrated optics, nanoelectronics, etc.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Reilly, Francis. "Accuracy, repeatability, reproducibility." Metal Finishing 102, no. 5 (May 2004): 8–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0026-0576(04)90151-1.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Caudill, S. P., and D. J. Boone. "Analytical variance and definition of a reference change as a function of calcium concentration." Clinical Chemistry 32, no. 2 (February 1, 1986): 308–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/32.2.308.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Using data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Proficiency Testing (PT) Surveys, we obtained estimates of repeatability (intralaboratory variability between results on the same material) and reproducibility (interlaboratory variability between results on the same material) for the Technicon SMA 6 (or 12/60) and SMAC 1 (or II) systems used with cresolphthalein complexone methodology to measure serum calcium. The two systems were comparable in terms of short-term (within-day) repeatability, long-term (three to six months) repeatability, short-term (one to two weeks) reproducibility, and long-term (three to six months) reproducibility. The long-term repeatability was essentially the same as the long-term reproducibility. Short-term repeatability, long-term repeatability, and long-term reproducibility increased linearly with increased calcium concentration over the range 1.75 to 2.95 mmol/L; short-term reproducibility showed no significant change over this range. The effect of analytical variance on the definition of a reference change in semiannual calcium measurements was demonstrated.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

CASSEY, PHILLIP, and TIM M. BLACKBURN. "Reproducibility and Repeatability in Ecology." BioScience 56, no. 12 (2006): 958. http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[958:rarie]2.0.co;2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Reilly, Francis. "Understanding accuracy, repeatability and reproducibility." Metal Finishing 105, no. 10 (2007): 537–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0026-0576(07)80372-2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Ellison, Stephen L. R., Pauline Key, and Roger Wood. "The Interlaboratory Performance of Microbiological Methods for Food Analysis." Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL 95, no. 5 (September 1, 2012): 1433–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5740/jaoacint.11-452.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Repeatability and reproducibility data for microbiological methods in food analysis were collated and assessed with a view to identifying useful or important trends. Generalized additive modeling for location, shape, and scale was used to model the distribution of variances. It was found that mean reproducibility for log10 (CFU) data is largely independent of concentration, while repeatability SD of log10 (CFU) data shows a strongly significant decrease in repeatability SD with increasing enumeration. The model for reproducibility SD gave a mean of 0.44, with an upper 95th percentile of approximately 0.76. Repeatability variance could be described reasonably well by a simple dichotomous model; at enumerations below 105/g, the model for repeatability SD gave a mean of approximately 0.35 and upper 95th percentile of 0.63. Above 105/g, the model gave a mean of 0.2 and upper 95th percentile of 0.36. A Horwitz-like function showed no appreciable advantage in describing the data set and gave apparently worse fit. The relationship between repeatability and reproducibility of log10 (CFU) is not constant across the concentration range studied. Both repeatability and reproducibility were found to depend on matrix class and organism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

De Rycke, Lieve, Aldo Vezzoni, Ingeborgh Polis, Jimmy Saunders, Bart Broeckx, and Mileva Bertal. "Technical Repeatability and Reproducibility of the Stress Radiographs Performed with the Vezzoni-Modified Badertscher Hip Distension Device." Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology 32, no. 01 (January 2019): 067–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1676306.

Full text

Abstract:

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility of the radiographical stress technique using the Vezzoni-modified Badertscher distension device (VMBDD). Materials and Methods Stress radiographs of 10 dogs obtained with the VMBDD were performed consecutively by two different operators and then measured twice by a third veterinarian. The technical repeatability was first assessed individually for the two operators who took the stress radiographs, followed by the technical reproducibility. The obtained variances were used to calculate the 95% limits of agreement for the measurement repeatability, the technical repeatability and the technical reproducibility. Results Both the technical repeatability and reproducibility of the VMBDD technique were good, with the 95% limits of agreement of the measurement repeatability and technical repeatability equalling ± 0.07 overall, and the 95% limits of agreement of the technical reproducibility being ± 0.09. Clinical Significance These results, in combination with the previous results for the measurement of the laxity index, support the use of the VMBDD as a reliable in-house evaluation method to assess the hip joint by trained clinicians. For screening purposes, however, we suggest to limit the number of evaluators, to limit the variability.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Karpinsk, K. F. "Reliability of Repeatability and Reproducibility Measures in Collaborative Trials." Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL 72, no. 6 (November 1, 1989): 931–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/72.6.931.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The acceptability of a new analytical method is generally assessed in terms of repeatability and reproducibility estimates derived from a collaborative study. Procedures are presented for calculating confidence intervals and operating characteristic curves for acceptance criteria based on the repeatability and reproducibility estimates. Comparisons of the reliability of estimates are provided for various numbers of collaborators. With a small number of collaborators, the estimates of reproducibility are not reliable and decisions regarding acceptability of a method will be heavily based on the method’s repeatability rather than the property of most interest, namely, the reproducibility of the method.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Martín, Raúl, Maria Izquierdo, Victoria De Juan, Guadalupe Rodriguez, and Itziar Fernandez. "Repeatability and reproducibility of Orbscan II." Optometry Reports 2, no. 1 (January 30, 2012): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/optometry.2012.e1.

Full text

Abstract:

This study aimed to determine the repeatability and reproducibility of Orbscan for anterior and posterior best fit sphere (BFS), simulated keratometry (Sim-K), and central (CCT) and mid-peripheral (PCT) corneal thickness measurements in healthy eyes. Orbscan was performed in 40 healthy eyes (20 subjects) three consecutive times on each cornea during three visits scheduled over one week. Repeatability and reproducibility coefficients [Bland and Altman’s coefficient (BAC), coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation (ICC)] were calculated for Orbscan anterior and posterior BFS, Sim-K and corneal pachymetry (central, superior, inferior, nasal and temporal locations). Repeatability was calculated using three consecutive measurements during each visit, while reproducibility was calculated using the average of the measurements obtained at each visit. High repeatability was found for all Orbscan measurements (r2<0.01; P>0.05, two-way ANOVA) with BAC and CV <1% (except in PCT coefficients; from 0.97% to 1.67%) and ICC close to 0.98- 0.99 for all visits. High reproducibility was also found for all Orbscan measurements (r2<0.01; P>0.05 two-way ANOVA). BAC values were less than 1% for both BFS and Sim- K, and between 1.21 and 2.20% for corneal pachymetry. CV values were less than 1% (except in superior, nasal and temporal PCT, where they ranged from 1.06 to 1.30%). ICC was close to 0.98-0.99 for all measurements. The BAC of reproducibility was higher than the CV of reproducibility. PCT showed less repeatability and reproducibility than CCT. The Orbscan provides non-invasive, repeatable and reproducible measurements of anterior and posterior BFS, simulated keratometry. and central and mid-peripheral pachymetry in healthy eyes.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Feitelson, Dror G. "From Repeatability to Reproducibility and Corroboration." ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review 49, no. 1 (January 20, 2015): 3–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2723872.2723875.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Taneri, Suphi, Samuel Arba-Mosquera, Anika Rost, Saskia Kießler, and H. Burkhard Dick. "Repeatability and reproducibility of manifest refraction." Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery 46, no. 12 (December 2020): 1659–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000343.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Mandel, John, and Theodore W. Lashof. "The Nature of Repeatability and Reproducibility." Journal of Quality Technology 19, no. 1 (January 1987): 29–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224065.1987.11979030.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Alberink, Ivo, and Arnout Ruifrok. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Earprint Acquisition." Journal of Forensic Sciences 53, no. 2 (March 2008): 325–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00663.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Halligan, S. "Reproducibility, repeatability, correlation and measurement error." British Journal of Radiology 75, no. 890 (February 2002): 193–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.75.890.750193.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Hao, Yiran, Lei Tian, Kai Cao, and Ying Jie. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of SMTube Measurement in Dry Eye Disease Patients." Journal of Ophthalmology 2021 (October 8, 2021): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/1589378.

Full text

Abstract:

Purpose. To evaluate the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility of Strip Meniscometry Tube (SMTube) and determine the correlations among the SMTube measurements and other ocular examinations in dry eye disease (DED) patients. Methods. The study recruited 73 eyes of 49 DED patients. Every subject was subjected to the following five measurements sequentially: the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire, Tear Meniscus Height (TMH) assessment, SMTube measurements, tear film breakup time (BUT) examination, and Schirmer I test (SIT). The repeatability and reproducibility of the measurements were assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Bland–Altman analysis, and the correlations were evaluated by the Spearman rank-order correlation. Results. The repeatability and reproducibility of the SMTube measurements were good in DED patients. The ICCs between the repeatability and reproducibility of the SMTube measurements were 0.789 and 0.741, respectively, and the Bland–Altman 95% limits of the repeatability and the reproducibility were −1.726 to 1.658 and −0.967 to 1.474, respectively (all P < 0.01 ). The SMTube measurements had correlations with TMH, BUT, and SIT. The Spearman rank correlation coefficients between SMTube and TMH; SMTube and Schirmer I test; and SMTube and BUT were 0.632, 0.617, and 0.653, respectively (all P < 0.01 ). Conclusions. The measurements of the SMTube may provide a novel, swift, noninvasive, and convenient approach to screen and diagnose DED with acceptable repeatability and reproducibility and specific correlations with TMH, BUT, and SIT.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Tilt, Nicola, and Martin A. Hamilton. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Germicide Tests: A Literature Review." Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL 82, no. 2 (March 1, 1999): 384–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/82.2.384.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The results of a quantitative antimicrobial assay can be summarized by the log reduction value. For an assay to be proposed as a standard method, it is usually necessary to conduct a collaborative study to demonstrate that the repeatability and reproducibility standard deviations (SDs) of the log reduction values are sufficiently small. It is not clear, however, precisely how small those SDs should be. This paper describes the results of a literature review conducted to determine the range of repeatability and reproducibility SDs for standard quantitative antimicrobial assays. The underlying premise is that, for an assay to have been accepted as a standard method, its repeatability and reproducibility SDs must have been sufficiently small. This premise implies that the repeatability and reproducibility SDs of standard assays establish de facto guidelines for acceptability. The survey comprised papers where the SDs could be extracted directly or where they could be calculated from accessible data. Papers describing suspension tests as well as hard surface tests were included. For the standard antimicrobial assays reviewed, repeatability SDs ranged from 0.25 to 1.21 and the reproducibility SDs ranged from 0.31 to 1.54.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Kola, Mehmet, Hikmet Duran, Adem Turk, Suleyman Mollamehmetoglu, Ahmet Kalkisim, and Hidayet Erdol. "Evaluation of the Repeatability and the Reproducibility of AL-Scan Measurements Obtained by Residents." Journal of Ophthalmology 2014 (2014): 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/739652.

Full text

Abstract:

Purpose. To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of ocular biometry and intraocular lens (IOL) power measurements obtained by ophthalmology residents using an AL-Scan device, a novel optical biometer.Methods. Two ophthalmology residents were instructed regarding the AL-Scan device. Both performed ocular biometry and IOL power measurements using AL-Scan, three times on each of 128 eyes, independently of one another. Corneal keratometry readings, horizontal iris width, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth, pupil size, and axial length values measured by both residents were recorded together with IOL power values calculated on the basis of four different IOL calculation formulas (SRK/T, Holladay, and HofferQ). Repeatability and reproducibility of the measurements obtained were analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).Results. Repeatability (ICC, 0.872-0.999 for resident 1 versus 0.905-0.999 for resident 2) and reproducibility (ICC, 0.916-0.999) were high for all biometric measurements. Repeatability (ICC, 0.981-0.983 for resident 1 versus 0.995-0.996 for resident 2) and reproducibility were also high for all IOL power measurements (ICC, 0.996 for all).Conclusions. The AL-Scan device exhibits good repeatability and reproducibility in all biometric measurements and IOL power calculations, independent of the operator concerned.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Kimble, Rachel, Karen M. Keane, John K. Lodge, and Glyn Howatson. "Methodological Considerations for a Vascular Function Test Battery." International Journal of Sports Medicine 40, no. 09 (July 15, 2019): 601–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0946-1293.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThere is a dearth of information regarding the reliability of non-invasive measures of vascular function taken in a single testing session. This study aimed to determine the test-retest reliability of a test battery of vascular function measures: automated blood pressure (BP), laser Doppler imaging with iontophoresis (LDI), digital volume pulse (DVP), pulse wave velocity (PWV), augmentation index (AIx) measured by pulse wave analysis (PWA) and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) taken within and between sessions. Measures were taken in 21 non-smoking males intra-session and again inter-session (one week apart) to determine repeatability and reproducibility, respectively. There was moderate to excellent repeatability (ICC: 0.53–0.93; CV=2.2–18.1%) and reproducibility (ICC: 0.71–0.96; CV 1.9–14.2%) for BP, DVP stiffness index, PWV, AIx, AIx normalised to heart rate (75 bpm), absolute and percentage FMD. Repeatability of the DVP reflection index was moderate (ICC: 0.64; CV=9.5%) but there was poor reproducibility (ICC: 0.17; CV=15.1%). Moreover, the repeatability and reproducibility of the LDI measures ranged from poor to good (ICC: 0.31–0.84; CV=28.4–36.7%). These data indicated that there was considerable variability in the repeatability and reproducibility of measurements of endothelial function and arterial stiffness taken in a battery of measurements, which needs careful consideration in future research designs.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

McClure, Foster D., and Jung-Keun Lee. "Procedures for Estimating Confidence Intervals for Selected Method Performance Parameters." Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL 84, no. 3 (May 1, 2001): 940–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/84.3.940.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Procedures for estimating confidence intervals (CIs) for the repeatability variance (σr2), reproducibility variance (σR2 = σL2 + σr2), laboratory component (σL2), and their corresponding standard deviations σr, σR, and σL, respectively, are presented. In addition, CIs for the ratio of the repeatability component to the reproducibility variance (σr2/σR2) and the ratio of the laboratory component to the reproducibility variance (σL2/σR2) are also presented.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Yu, Ayong, Weiqi Zhao, Giacomo Savini, Zixu Huang, Fangjun Bao, Weicong Lu, Qinmei Wang, and Jinhai Huang. "Evaluation of Central Corneal Thickness Using Corneal Dynamic Scheimpflug Analyzer Corvis ST and Comparison with Pentacam Rotating Scheimpflug System and Ultrasound Pachymetry in Normal Eyes." Journal of Ophthalmology 2015 (2015): 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/767012.

Full text

Abstract:

Purpose.To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements by corneal dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer Corvis ST in normal eyes and compare the agreement with Pentacam rotating Scheimpflug System and ultrasound pachymetry.Methods.84 right eyes underwent Corvis ST measurements performed by two operators. The test-retest repeatability (TRT), within-subject coefficient of variation (CoV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to evaluate the intraoperator repeatability and interoperator reproducibility. CCT measurements also were obtained from Pentacam and ultrasound pachymetry by the first operator. The agreement between the three devices was evaluated with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and Bland-Altman plots.Results.Corvis ST showed high repeatability as indicated by TRT ≤ 13.0 μm, CoV < 0.9%, and ICC > 0.97. The interoperator reproducibility was also excellent. The CoV was <0.9%, and ICC was >0.97. Corvis ST showed significantly lower values than Pentacam and ultrasound pachymetry (P<0.001). The 95% LoA between Corvis ST and Pentacam or ultrasound pachymetry were −15.8 to 9.5 μm and −27.9 to 12.3 μm, respectively.Conclusions.Corvis ST showed excellent repeatability and interoperator reproducibility of CCT measurements in normal eyes. Corvis ST is interchangeable with Pentacam but not with ultrasound pachymetry.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Tian, Lei, Jing-hao Qu, Xiao-yu zhang, and Xu-guang Sun. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Noninvasive Keratograph 5M Measurements in Patients with Dry Eye Disease." Journal of Ophthalmology 2016 (2016): 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/8013621.

Full text

Abstract:

Purpose. To determine the intraexaminer repeatability and interexaminer reproducibility of tear meniscus height (TMH) and noninvasive Keratograph tear breakup time (NIKBUT) measurements obtained with the Keratograph 5M (K5M) in a sample of healthy and dry eye populations.Methods. Forty-two patients with dry eye disease (DED group) and 42 healthy subjects (healthy group) were recruited in this prospective study. In all subjects, each eye received 3 consecutive measurements using the K5M for the TMH and NIKBUTs (NIKBUT-first and NIKBUT-average). And then a different examiner repeated the measurements. The repeatability and reproducibility of measurements were assessed by the coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).Results. The repeatability and reproducibility of TMH and NIKBUTs were good in both DED and healthy groups (CV% ≤ 26.1% and ICC ≥ 0.75 for all measurements). Patients with DED showed better intraexaminer repeatability for NIKBUTs, but worse for TMH than healthy subjects. Average TMH, NIKBUT-first, and NIKBUT-average were significantly lower in DED group than in healthy group (allPvalues < 0.05).Conclusions. Measurements of TMH and NIKBUTs obtained with the K5M may provide a simple, noninvasive screening test for dry eye with acceptable repeatability and reproducibility. The NIKBUTs were more reliable, but TMH was less reliable in patients with DED.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Rocha, Sergio, Vivek Tandon, and Soheil Nazarian. "Falling Weight Deflectometer Fleet Repeatability and Reproducibility." Road Materials and Pavement Design 5, no. 2 (June 30, 2004): 215–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.3166/rmpd.5.215-238.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

LoVerde, John, and Wayland Dong. "Repeatability and reproducibility concepts in acoustical laboratories." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 130, no. 4 (October 2011): 2355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3654436.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Franks, John R., William J. Murphy, and Stephen D. Simon. "Repeatability and reproducibility in hearing protector testing." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99, no. 4 (April 1996): 2464–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.415505.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Perches, Sara, M. Victoria Collados, and Jorge Ares. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Virtual Subjective Refraction." Optometry and Vision Science 93, no. 10 (October 2016): 1243–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/opx.0000000000000923.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Petersen, DR, RE Link, and J. Mandel. "Repeatability and Reproducibility for Pass/Fail Data." Journal of Testing and Evaluation 25, no. 2 (1997): 151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/jte11472j.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Boboridis, K. "Repeatability and reproducibility of upper eyelid measurements." British Journal of Ophthalmology 85, no. 1 (January 1, 2001): 99–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjo.85.1.99.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Hamaker, H. C. "A Statistician’s Approach to Repeatability and Reproducibility." Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL 69, no. 3 (May 1, 1986): 417–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/69.3.417.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Repeatability and reproducibility are 2 concepts jointly describing the precision of tests performed according to some standard test method. The statistical principles underlying these concepts are explained in Fart I. In Part II, these principles are applied to the design, statistical analysis, and interpretation of collaborative, or interlaboratory, studies especially organized for finding numerical estimates, sr and sR, of the repeatability and reproducibility standard deviations, σr and σR.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Arnould, Louis, Déa Haddad, Florian Baudin, Pierre-Henry Gabrielle, Marc Sarossy, Alain M. Bron, Behzad Aliahmad, and Catherine Creuzot-Garcher. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Retinal Fractal Dimension Measured with Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography in Healthy Eyes: A Proof-of-Concept Study." Diagnostics 12, no. 7 (July 21, 2022): 1769. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12071769.

Full text

Abstract:

The retinal vascular network fractal dimension (FD) could be a promising imaging biomarker. Our objective was to evaluate its repeatability and reproducibility in healthy eyes. A cross-sectional study was undertaken with young, healthy volunteers who had no reported cardiac risk factors or ocular disease history. For each participant, three SS-OCTA images (12 × 12 mm) were acquired using the Plex Elite 9000 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) by two ophthalmologists. Automated segmentation was obtained from both the superficial and deep capillary plexuses. FD was estimated by box counting. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used as measures for repeatability and reproducibility. A total of 43 eyes of healthy volunteers were included. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age was 30 ± 6.2 years. The results show good repeatability. The ICC was 0.722 (95% CI, 0.541–0.839) in the superficial capillary plexus and 0.828 (95% CI, 0.705–0.903) in the deep capillary plexus. For reproducibility, the ICC was 0.651 (95% CI, 0.439–0.795) and 0.363 (95% CI, 0.073–0.596) at the superficial and deep capillary plexus, respectively. In this study, the FD of the vascular network measured via SS-OCTA showed good repeatability and reproducibility in healthy participants.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Lopes, Bernardo T., Cynthia J. Roberts, Ahmed Elsheikh, Riccardo Vinciguerra, Paolo Vinciguerra, Sven Reisdorf, Stefanie Berger, Robert Koprowski, and Renato Ambrósio. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Intraocular Pressure and Dynamic Corneal Response Parameters Assessed by the Corvis ST." Journal of Ophthalmology 2017 (2017): 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8515742.

Full text

Abstract:

Purpose. To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of dynamic corneal response parameters measured by the Corvis ST (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany). Methods. One eye randomly selected from 32 healthy volunteers was examined by the Corvis ST. Three different devices were used in an alternated random order for taking three measurements at each device in each subject. Standard intraocular pressure (IOP), the biomechanical-compensated IOP (bIOP), and DCR parameters were evaluated. The within-subject standard deviation (ζw) and coefficient of variation (CV) were assessed. Results. Regarding pressure indices, the ζw was below 1 mmHg for repeatability (0.98 for IOP and 0.89 for bIOP) and the CV was 6.6% for IOP and 6.1% for bIOP. For reproducibility, the ζw was around 1 mmHg (1.12 for IOP and 1.05 for bIOP) and the CV was 7.6% for IOP and 7.1% for bIOP. Most of DCR indices presented CV for repeatability below 4%. For reproducibility, the CV of most of the indices were below 6%. The deformation amplitude (DA) ratio in 1 mm and integrated radius were below 4% (1.2% and 3.8%, resp.). Conclusions. The Corvis ST showed good precision (repeatability and reproducibility) for IOP measurements and for DCR in healthy eyes.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Bhatt, Mahendra Prasad, P. Gyawali, RK Joshi, B. Sharma, NP Bhatt, S. Bhandari, and A. Nagila. "A Multi-Center Assessment of Thyroid Function Test Precision in Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA) Systems." Journal of Gandaki Medical College-Nepal 11, no. 02 (December 31, 2018): 8–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jgmcn.v11i02.22996.

Full text

Abstract:

Background: Chemiluminiscence immunoassay (CLIA) is exclusively pragmatic technology for the analysis of biomarker for diagnosis of thyroid disorders. However, performance characteristics of different chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) systems supplied by different manufacturers in diverse set up for thyroid function test (TFT) has not yet been studied well. Objective: Our aim is to evaluate laboratory results by assessment of the reproducibility and repeatability of TFTs in three different diagnostic set up to assure the quality of thyroid hormone assay using chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) instruments: Advia Centaur CP (Siemens), Access 2 (Beckman Coulter) and Liaison (Diasorin). Materials and Methods: Among the adult male and female individuals visited for thyroid hormone assay, 51 normal individuals were selected for the study. Three aliquots of serum samples were distributed to assess the reproducibility of three different CLIA equipments operated in three diagnostic centers. Additional three aliquots of serum were analyzed weekly for TFT (fFT3, fFT4 and TSH) to check the repeatability of assay in ADVIA Centaur CP set up. Assay precision was determined by reproducibility and repeatability of test results. Results: Results of TFTs of serum samples obtained from three different interlaboratory assays using different CLIA systems have achieved good precision showing minimal variance (P>0.05) and acceptable reproducibility. Results are also precise with adequate repeatability showing minimal variance (P >0.05) obtained from the three different intra-laboratory assays in a single CLIA system using ADVIA Centaur CP by same team. Conclusion: Our study elucidates the thyroid hormone assay performance of CLIA systems in three centers, which has shown assay precision with good reproducibility and repeatability of thyroid hormone assay. Thus, the analysis of precision as an essential component of quality control is necessary to deliver precise diagnostic services.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Piotrowiak, Ilona, Beata Soldanska, Mateusz Burduk, Bartlomiej J. Kaluzny, and Jozef Kaluzny. "Measuring Corneal Thickness with SOCT, the Scheimpflug System, and Ultrasound Pachymetry." ISRN Ophthalmology 2012 (September 27, 2012): 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/869319.

Full text

Abstract:

Background and Objective. Evaluation of agreement, repeatability, and reproducibility of central and minimal corneal thickness (CCT and MCT) measurements obtained by SOCT, the Scheimpflug system, and ultrasound pachymetry. Materials and Methods. 28 eyes of healthy patients were enrolled. Pachymetry measurements were performed with SOCT, the Scheimpflug system, and ultrasound instrument. Each measurement was taken by 3 operators on 3 devices providing a total of 2100 measurements. Results. The mean CCT for SOCT, Scheimpflug system, and ultrasound instrument was 537.92, 545.94, and 555.74 μm, respectively, (). The respective mean coefficients of repeatability for CCT were 0.61, 0.82 and 0.80, whereas mean coefficients of interoperator reproducibility for CCT were 0.91, 1.11, and 1.25. Conclusions. CCT and MCT measurements show moderate agreement between instruments. The repeatability and interoperator reproducibility of the results obtained by SOCT are somewhat higher. The operator's impact on CCT and MCT measurements is insignificant in all devices.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Sörös, Peter, Louise Wölk, Carsten Bantel, Anja Bräuer, Frank Klawonn, and Karsten Witt. "Replicability, Repeatability, and Long-term Reproducibility of Cerebellar Morphometry." Cerebellum 20, no. 3 (January 9, 2021): 439–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12311-020-01227-2.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractTo identify robust and reproducible methods of cerebellar morphometry that can be used in future large-scale structural MRI studies, we investigated the replicability, repeatability, and long-term reproducibility of three fully automated software tools: FreeSurfer, CEREbellum Segmentation (CERES), and automatic cerebellum anatomical parcellation using U-Net with locally constrained optimization (ACAPULCO). Replicability was defined as computational replicability, determined by comparing two analyses of the same high-resolution MRI data set performed with identical analysis software and computer hardware. Repeatability was determined by comparing the analyses of two MRI scans of the same participant taken during two independent MRI sessions on the same day for the Kirby-21 study. Long-term reproducibility was assessed by analyzing two MRI scans of the same participant in the longitudinal OASIS-2 study. We determined percent difference, the image intraclass correlation coefficient, the coefficient of variation, and the intraclass correlation coefficient between two analyses. Our results show that CERES and ACAPULCO use stochastic algorithms that result in surprisingly high differences between identical analyses for ACAPULCO and small differences for CERES. Changes between two consecutive scans from the Kirby-21 study were less than ± 5% in most cases for FreeSurfer and CERES (i.e., demonstrating high repeatability). As expected, long-term reproducibility was lower than repeatability for all software tools. In summary, CERES is an accurate, as demonstrated before, and reproducible tool for fully automated segmentation and parcellation of the cerebellum. We conclude with recommendations for the assessment of replicability, repeatability, and long-term reproducibility in future studies on cerebellar structure.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Delguste, C., G. Perona, P. Lebecque, F. Duboeuf, O. Lepage, W. Martin-Rosset, and M. Donabedian. "Third metacarpal bone mineral density assessment in the standing horse by dual X-ray absorptiometry." Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology 18, no. 01 (2005): 26–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1632924.

Full text

Abstract:

SummaryBone mineral density (BMD) is correlated to mechanical properties of bone. In the horse, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has yet only been performed ex-vivo, but a new portable DXA device would be ideal for in-vivo BMD measurement. We explored field suitability, precision and accuracy of this device for in-vivo third metacarpal density assessment. Precision was analysed by calculating measurement variation under repeated measurement tests with (reproducibility) and without (repeatability) limb repositioning. Repeatability and reproducibility were tested ex-vivo, at the same time that intra- and inter-operator reproducibility were assessed in-vivo. In order to test accuracy, bone mineral content (BMC) of several bone samples determined by DXA and ashing were compared. Repeatability was 1.47% and reproducibility 1.69% ex-vivo. In-vivo reproducibility varied between 2.91 and 4.06% for intraoperator test and between 3.13 and 5.53% for interoperator test. BMC measured by DXA and ash weight were highly correlated (R2>0.99). In conclusion, under described conditions this DXA device is usable, accurate and precise. Its sensitiveness reaches 8.23% in an individual longitudinal monitoring. Using the third metacarpal bone as an example, we have shown that this device is suitable for experimental or clinical monitoring.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Euler, André, Fabian Christopher Laqua, Davide Cester, Niklas Lohaus, Thomas Sartoretti, Daniel Pinto dos Santos, Hatem Alkadhi, and Bettina Baessler. "Virtual Monoenergetic Images of Dual-Energy CT—Impact on Repeatability, Reproducibility, and Classification in Radiomics." Cancers 13, no. 18 (September 20, 2021): 4710. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13184710.

Full text

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to (i) evaluate the test–retest repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features in virtual monoenergetic images (VMI) from dual-energy CT (DECT) depending on VMI energy (40, 50, 75, 120, 190 keV), radiation dose (5 and 15 mGy), and DECT approach (dual-source and split-filter DECT) in a phantom (ex vivo), and (ii) to assess the impact of VMI energy and feature repeatability on machine-learning-based classification in vivo in 72 patients with 72 hypodense liver lesions. Feature repeatability and reproducibility were determined by concordance–correlation–coefficient (CCC) and dynamic range (DR) ≥0.9. Test–retest repeatability was high within the same VMI energies and scan conditions (percentage of repeatable features ranging from 74% for SFDE mode at 40 keV and 15 mGy to 86% for DSDE at 190 keV and 15 mGy), while reproducibility varied substantially across different VMI energies and DECTs (percentage of reproducible features ranging from 32.8% for SFDE at 5 mGy comparing 40 with 190 keV to 99.2% for DSDE at 15 mGy comparing 40 with 50 keV). No major differences were observed between the two radiation doses (<10%) in all pair-wise comparisons. In vivo, machine learning classification using penalized regression and random forests resulted in the best discrimination of hemangiomas and metastases at low-energy VMI (40 keV), and for cysts at high-energy VMI (120 keV). Feature selection based on feature repeatability did not improve classification performance. Our results demonstrate the high repeatability of radiomics features when keeping scan and reconstruction conditions constant. Reproducibility diminished when using different VMI energies or DECT approaches. The choice of optimal VMI energy improved lesion classification in vivo and should hence be adapted to the specific task.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Faustino, Daniela, Adriane Vieira, Cláudia Tarragô Candotti, Emanuelle Francine Detogni Schmit, Morgana Franciele Rios Xavier, Victória Alcantara Lunelli, and Jefferson Fagundes Loss. "Repeatability and reproducibility of the pressure biofeedback unit." Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies 27 (July 2021): 560–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.04.017.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Mikulová, Pavlína, Jiří Plura, and Krzysztof Knop. "Repeatability and Reproducibility Studies for Non-Replicable Tests." System Safety: Human - Technical Facility - Environment 2, no. 1 (March 1, 2020): 275–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/czoto-2020-0034.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe paper presents several approaches to gauge repeatability and reproducibility (GRR) analysis regarding non-replicable measurements. Measurement systems have to deal with processes in which, by the nature of the measured object or by the type of measurement itself, measurements are not repeatable. In these cases, each sample unit can be measured only once. Such situations are referred as nonreplicable measurement systems. The aim of the paper is to map out the current approaches being used in GRR analysis in various cases of non-replicable tests and compare each other in order to find out the suitable use of analysis application. Approaches used are subject to critical analysis so that its review can serve a useful base for analysis of different non-replicable tests. At present, it is desirable to bring the improving actions in order to obtain the results of high quality from such kind of measurements. Since different non-replicable tests can measure a different quality characteristic, it is valuable to bring the appropriate designs for various tests. Subsequently, this review will serve an outline how to proceed in analyzing the results obtained by non-replicable tests. Specifically, GRR analysis works with two known designs named as “Crossed” and “Nested” design, which statistical software normally use. Doubtfully, crossed design is suggested to use at certain cases and nested at other specific cases. This is assessed and improving actions designed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

LoVerde, John J., and David W. Dong. "Categories of repeatability and reproducibility in acoustical laboratories." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 137, no. 4 (April 2015): 2216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4920071.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Gunvant, P., DC Broadway, and RJ Watkins. "Repeatability and reproducibility of the BVI ultrasonic Pachymeter." Eye 17, no. 7 (October 2003): 825–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6700485.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Sweeney, Shannon. "Analysis of Two-dimensional Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility." Quality Engineering 19, no. 1 (December 21, 2006): 29–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08982110601057641.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Loverde, John, and Wayland Dong. "Repeatability and reproducibility of field noise isolation testing." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 123, no. 5 (May 2008): 3504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2934389.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Haynes, Sydney, and Michael N. Y. Chau. "The reproducibility and repeatability of the Wits analysis." American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 107, no. 6 (June 1995): 640–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(95)70108-7.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Candotti, Cláudia Tarragô, Grazielle Martins Gelain, Arthur Antoniolli, Liliane Martini Araújo, Adriane Vieira, and Jefferson Fagundes Loss. "Repeatability and Reproducibility of Postural Variables by Photogrammetry." Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 42, no. 5 (June 2019): 372–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2018.10.006.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Kubátová, D., M. Melichar, and J. Kutlwašer. "Evaluation of Repeatability and reproducibility of CMM equipment." Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017): 558–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.091.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Mahieu, C., P. Salvia, P. P. Martin-Sisteron, B. Beyer, J. Coupier, O. Snoeck, H. Bajou, et al. "New foot segmentation model: Repeatability and reproducibility study." Gait & Posture 42 (December 2015): S81—S82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.03.137.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Cepova, Lenka, Andrea Kovacikova, Robert Cep, Pavel Klaput, and Ondrej Mizera. "Measurement System Analyses – Gauge Repeatability and Reproducibility Methods." Measurement Science Review 18, no. 1 (February 1, 2018): 20–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/msr-2018-0004.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The submitted article focuses on a detailed explanation of the average and range method (Automotive Industry Action Group, Measurement System Analysis approach) and of the honest Gauge Repeatability and Reproducibility method (Evaluating the Measurement Process approach). The measured data (thickness of plastic parts) were evaluated by both methods and their results were compared on the basis of numerical evaluation. Both methods were additionally compared and their advantages and disadvantages were discussed. One difference between both methods is the calculation of variation components. The AIAG method calculates the variation components based on standard deviation (then a sum of variation components does not give 100 %) and the honest GRR study calculates the variation components based on variance, where the sum of all variation components (part to part variation, EV & AV) gives the total variation of 100 %. Acceptance of both methods among the professional society, future use, and acceptance by manufacturing industry were also discussed. Nowadays, the AIAG is the leading method in the industry.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Branch, Thomas, Shaun Stinton, Maya Sternberg, William Hutton, Frédéric Lavoie, Christian Guier, and Philippe Neyret. "Robotic axial lower leg testing: repeatability and reproducibility." Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 23, no. 10 (September 10, 2015): 2892–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3768-4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Larivière, O., T. Provot, L. Valdes-Tamayo, M. Bourgain, and D. Chadefaux. "Repeatability and reproducibility of stance phase during running." Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering 22, sup1 (October 3, 2019): S359—S361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2020.1714944.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Ribo, Juan M., Miguel Canela, and Eul�lia Griful. "Repeatability and reproducibility of the luminescent bacteria bioassay." Environmental Toxicology 16, no. 2 (2001): 127–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tox.1016.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!