Analytical Performance Characteristics

AMC (1995) The Analytical Methods Committee: Uncertainty of measurement — implications for its use in analytical science. Analyst 120:2303CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arnold SF (1990) Mathematical statistics. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar

Bergmann G, von Oepen B, Zinn P (1987) Improvement in the definitions of sensitivity and selectivity. Anal Chem 59:2522CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Björn E, Frech W, Hoffmann E, Lüdke C (1998) Investigation and quantification of spectroscopic interferences from polyatomic species in inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry using electrothermal vaporization or pneumatic nebulization for sample introduction. Spectrochim Acta 53B:1766Google Scholar

Boumans PWJM (1991) Measuring detection limits in inductively coupled plasma emission spectrometry using the “SBR-RSDB approach” — I. A tutorial discussion of the theory. Spectrochim Acta 46B:431Google Scholar

Boumans PWJM (1994) Detection limits and spectral interferences in atomic emission spectrometry. Anal Chem 66:459AGoogle Scholar

Burns DT, Danzer K, Townshend A (2005) IUPAC, Analytical Chemistry Division: Use of the terms “Robust” and “Rugged” and the associated characteristics of “Robustness” and “Ruggedness” in descriptions of analytical procedures. Draft 2005Google Scholar

Currie LA (1992) In pursuit of accuracy: nomenclature, assumtions, and standards. Pure Appl Chem 64:455Google Scholar

Currie LA (1995) IUPAC, Analytical Chemistry Division, Commission on Analytical Nomenclature: Nomenclature in evaluation of analytical methods including detection and quantification capabilities. Pure Appl Chem 67:1699Google Scholar

Currie LA (1997) Detection: International update, and some emerging dilemmas involving calibration, the blank, and multiple detection decisions. Chemometrics Intell Lab Syst 37:151CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danzer K (1975) Zur Ermittlung der Informationsmenge bei spektrochemischen Analysenverfahren. Z Chem 15:158Google Scholar

Danzer K (1990) Problems of calibration in trace-, in-situ-micro-, and surface analysis. Fresenius J Anal Chem 337:794CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danzer K (2001) Selectivity and specificity in analytical chemistry. General considerations and attempt of a definition and quantification. Fresenius J Anal Chem 369:397CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danzer K (2004) A closer look at analytical signals. Anal Bioanal Chem 380:376CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danzer K, Fischbacher C, Jagemann K-U, Reichelt KJ (1998) Near-infrared diffuse reflection spectroscopy for non-invasive blood-glucose monitoring. LEOS Newsletter 12:2–9Google Scholar

Danzer K, Schubert M, Liebich V (1991) Information theory in analytical chemistry. III. Distribution-analytical investigations. Fresenius J Anal Chem 341:511CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danzer K, Than E, Molch D, Küchler L (1987) Analytik — Systematischer Überblick, 2nd edn. Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft Geest & Portig, Leipzig/Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, StuttgartGoogle Scholar

Danzer K, Wagner M (1993) Multisignal calibration in optical emission spectroscopy. Fresenius J Anal Chem 346:520CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danzer K, Venth K (1994) Multisignal calibration in spark-and ICP-OES. Fresenius J Anal Chem 350:339CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davies OL, Goldsmith PL (1984) Statistical methods in research and production. Longman, LondonGoogle Scholar

De la Calle García D, Reichenbächer M, Danzer K, Hurlbeck C, Bartzsch C, Feller K-H (1998) Use of solid-phase microextraction capillary gas chromatography (SPME-CGC) for the varietal characterization of wines by means of chemometrical methods. Fresenius J Anal Chem 360:784CrossRefGoogle Scholar

den Boef G, Hulanicki A (1983) IUPAC, Analytical Chemistry Division, Commission on Analytical Reactions and Reagents: Recommendations for the usage of selective, selectivity and related terms in analytical chemistry. Pure Appl Chem 55:553Google Scholar

Doerffel K (1990) Statistik in der analytischen Chemie. Deutscher Verlag für Grundstof findustrie, LeipzigGoogle Scholar

Doerffel K, Müller H, Ullmann M (1986) Prozessanalytik. Deutscher Verlag für Grundstof findustrie, LeipzigGoogle Scholar

Doerffel K, Eckschlager K, Henrion G (1990) Chemometrische Strategien in der Analytik. Deutscher Verlag für Grundstoffindustrie, LeipzigGoogle Scholar

Eckschlager K, Danzer K (1994) Information theory in analytical chemistry. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Ehrlich G (1969) Entwicklung und gegenwärtiger Stand der Bemühungen um eine objektive Charakterisierung des Nachweisvermögens analytischer Verfahren. Wiss Z TH Leuna-Merseburg 11:22Google Scholar

Ehrlich G, Danzer K (2006) Nachweisvermögen von Analysenverfahren. Objektive Bewertung und Ergebnisinterpretation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar

EURACHEM (1995) Quantifying uncertainty in analytical measurement. TeddingtonGoogle Scholar

EURACHEM (1998) The fitness for purpose of analytical methods. TeddingtonGoogle Scholar

Fleming J, Albus H, Neidhart B, Wegscheider W (1997a) Glossary of analytical terms (VII). Accr Qual Assur 2:51CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fleming J, Albus H, Neidhart B, Wegscheider W (1997b) Glossary of analytical terms (VIII). Accr Qual Assur 2:160CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fleming J, Neidhart B, Tausch C, Wegscheider W (1996a) Glossary of analytical terms (I). Accr Qual Assur 1:41CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fleming J, Albus H, Neidhart B, Wegscheider W (1996b) Glossary of analytical terms (II). Accr Qual Assur 1:87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fleming J, Neidhart B, Albus H, Wegscheider W (1996c) Glossary of analytical terms (III). Accr Qual Assur 1:135CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fujiwara K, McHard JA, Foulk SJ, Bayer S, Winefordner JD (1980) Evaluation of selectivity in atomic absorption and atomic emission spectrometry. Canadian J Spectrosc 25:18Google Scholar

Geiß S, Einax JW (2001) Comparison of detection limits in environmental analysis — is it possible? An approach on quality assurance in the lower working range by verification. Fresenius J Anal Chem 370:673CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gottschalk G (1975) Standardisierung quantitativer Analysenverfahren — I. Allgemeine Grundlagen. Fresenius Z Anal Chem 275:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Graf U, Henning H-U, Stange K, Wilrich P-Th (1987) Formeln und Tabellen der angewandten mathematischen Statistik. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (3. Aufl)Google Scholar

Hendricks MMWB, de Boer AH, Smilde AK (1996) Robustness of analytical chemical methods and pharmaceutical technological products. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar

Horn R (2000) Kopplung einer elektrothermischen Verdampfungseinheit mit einem ICP-Massenspektrometer zur Verbesserung der Nachweisgrenze und der Spezifität. Diploma Thesis, Friedrich Schiller University of JenaGoogle Scholar

Horwitz W, Kamps LR, Boyer KW (1980) Quality assurance in the analysis of foods for trace constituents. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 63:1344Google Scholar

Huber PJ (1981) Robust statistics. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

ICH (1994) ICH Topic Q2A (ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline): Validation of analytical methods: Definitions and terminology (CPMP/ICH/381/95), ICH, LondonGoogle Scholar

ICH (1996) ICH Topic Q2B (ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline): Validation of analytical methods: Methodology (CPMP/ICH/281/95), ICH, LondonGoogle Scholar

Inczédy J, Lengyiel JT, Ure AM, Geleneser A, Hulanicki A (Eds) (1997) Compendium of analytical nomenclature, 3rd edn (IUPAC Orange Book), Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar

ISO 3534-1 (1993), International Organization for Standardization (BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, OIML), International vocabulary of basis and general terms in metrology. GenevaGoogle Scholar

ISO 78-2 (1999) International Organisation for Standarization: Layout for standards — 2. Methods of chemical analysis. GenevaGoogle Scholar

IUPAC Orange Book (1997, 2000) — printed version: Compendium of analytical nomenclature (Definitive Rules 1997); see Inczédy et al. (1997) — web version (from 2000 on): www.iupac.org/publications/analytical compendium/Google Scholar

IUPAC (1995) Analytical Chemistry Division, Commission on Analytical Nomenclature: Nomenclature in evaluation of analytical methods including detection and quantification capabilities, prepared for publication by LA Currie, Pure Appl Chem 67:1699Google Scholar

Jochum C, Jochum P, Kowalski BR (1981) Error propagation and optimal performance in multicomponent analysis. Anal Chem 53:85Google Scholar

Kaiser H (1965) Zum Problem Nachweisgrenze. Fresenius Z Anal Chem 209:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaiser H (1966) Zur Definition der Nachweisgrenze, der Garantiegrenze und der dabei benutzten Begriffe. Fresenius Z Anal Chem 216:80CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaiser H (1970) Quantitation in elemental analysis. Part I. Anal Chem 42(2):24A, Part II. 42(4):26AGoogle Scholar

Kaiser H (1972) Zur Definition von Selektivität, Spezifität und Empfindlichkeit von Analysenverfahren. Fresenius Z Anal Chem 260:252CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaiser H, Specker H (1956) Bewertung und Vergleich von Analysenverfahren. Fresenius Z Anal Chem 149:46CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kateman G, Buydens L (1993) Quality control in analytical chemistry, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Kellner R, Mermet J-M, Otto M, Widmer HM (eds) (1998) Analytical chemistry. Wiley-VCH, WeinheimGoogle Scholar

Lieck G (1998) Nachweisgrenze und Rauschen. LaborPraxis 22/June:62Google Scholar

Long GL, Winefordner JD (1983) Limit of detection. A closer look at the IUPAC Definition. Anal Chem 55:712AGoogle Scholar

Massart DL, Vandeginste BGM, Deming SN, Michotte Y, Kaufman L (1988) Chemometrics: a textbook. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar

O’Rangers JJ, Condon RJ (2000) In: Kay JP, MacNeil JD, O’Rangers JJ (eds), Current issues in regulatory chemistry. (AOAC Int., Gaithersburg, MD, p 207Google Scholar

Persson B-A, Vessman J (1998) Generating selectivity in analytical chemistry to reach the ultimate — specifity. Trends Anal Chem 17:117CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Persson B-A, Vessman J (2001) The use of selectivity in analytical chemistry — some considerations. Trends Anal Chem 20:526CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Prichard E, Green J, Houlgate P, Miller J, Newman E, Phillips G, Rowley A (2001) Analytical measurement terminology — handbook of terms used in quality assurance of analytical measurement. LGC, Teddington, Royal Society of Chemistry, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Rodriguez LC, Garcia RB, Garcia Campana AM, Bosque Sendra JM (1998) A new approach to a complete robustness test of experimental nominal conditions of chemical testing procedures for internal analytical quality assessment. Chemom Intell Lab Syst 41:57CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sachs L (1992) Angewandte Statistik, 7th edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York [1383]Google Scholar

Sharaf MA, Illman DL, Kowalski BR (1986) Chemometrics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

St John PA, McCarthy WJ, Winefordner JD (1966) Application of signal-to-noise theory in molecular luminescence spectrometry. Anal Chem 38:1828CrossRefGoogle Scholar

St John PA, McCarthy WJ, Winefordner JD (1967) A statistical method for evaluation of limiting detectable sample concentrations. Anal Chem 39:1495CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Streck S (2004) Die schnelle und effiziente analytische Bestimmung von Mengen-, Spuren-und Ultraspurenelementen im Blutplasma von Patienten mit unterschiedlichen Erkrankungen und der statistische Vergleich mit einer Kontrollgruppe. Doctoral thesis, Friedrich Schiller University of JenaGoogle Scholar

Sturgeon RE, Lam JW (1999) The ETV as a thermochemical reactor for ICP-MS sample introduction. J Anal Atomic Spectrom 14:785CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taylor JK [1983] Validation of analytical methods. Anal Chem 55:600AGoogle Scholar

Thiel G, Danzer K (1997) Direct analysis of mineral components in wine by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). Fresenius J Anal Chem 357:553CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thompson M (1995) Uncertainty in an uncertain world. Analyst 120:117NCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thompson M, Statistical Subcommittee of the Analytical Method Committee (2004) The amazing Horwitz function. AMC Techn Brief 17Google Scholar

Trullols E, Ruisanchez I, Rius FX (2004) Validation of qualitative analytical methods. Trends Anal Chem 23:137CrossRefGoogle Scholar

USP 23-NF18 (1995) The US pharmacopoeia & the national formulary. US Pharmacopeial Convention Inc, Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar

USP 24-NF19 (2000) The US pharmacopoeia & the national formulary. US Pharmacopeial Convention Inc, Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar

Valcarcel M (2000) Principles of analytical chemistry. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar

Venth K, Danzer K, Kundermann G, Blaufuß K-H (1996) Multisignal evaluation in ICPMS. Determination of trace elements in Mo-Zr-alloys. Fresenius J Anal Chem 354:811Google Scholar

Vessman J, Stefan RI, van Staden JF, Danzer K, Lindner W, Burns DT, Fajgelj A, Müller H (2001) IUPAC, Analytical Chemistry Division, Commission on General Aspects of Analytical Chemistry: Selectivity in analytical chemistry. Pure Appl Chem 73:1381Google Scholar

Wahlich JC, Carr GP (1990) Chromatographic system suitability tests — what should we be using? J Pharmac Biomed Anal 8:619CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wildner H, Wünsch G (1997) Neue Ansätze zur Quantifizierung der Robustheit als Güutekennzahl analytischer Systeme im Hinblick auf Bewertbarkeit und Vergleichbarkeit. J prakt Chem 339:107CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Winefordner JD, Vickers TJ (1964) Calculation of limit of detectability in atomic absorption flame spectrometry. Anal Chem 36:1947CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Winefordner JD, Parsons ML, Mansfield JM, McCarthy WJ (1967) Derivation of expressions for calculation of limiting detectable atomic concentration in atomic fluorescence flame spectrometry. Anal Chem 39:436CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wünsch G (1994) Robustheit und Anfälligkeit als Kenngrößen zur Bewertung analytischer Systeme. J Prakt Chem 339:107Google Scholar

Zeaiter M, Roger J-M, Bellon-Maurel V, Rutledge DN (2004) Robustness of models developed by multivariate calibration. Part I. The assessment of robustness. Trends Anal Chem 23:157CrossRefGoogle Scholar