Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In analytical chemistry, cross-validation is an approach by which the sets of scientific data generated using two or more methods are critically assessed. [1] The cross-validation can be categorized as either method validation [1] or analytical data validation. [citation needed]
This method is much more convenient. However, convenience comes at the cost of specificity and coverage of a wide range of drugs, therefore, HPLC has been used as well as an alternative method. As HPLC is a method of determining (and possibly increasing) purity, using HPLC alone in evaluating concentrations of drugs was somewhat insufficient.
Verification is intended to check that a product, service, or system meets a set of design specifications. [6] [7] In the development phase, verification procedures involve performing special tests to model or simulate a portion, or the entirety, of a product, service, or system, then performing a review or analysis of the modeling results.
Validation and Quality Control: It is important to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the integration process, by performing validation and quality control checks to the software itself. This may involve comparing integration results with known standards, replicating analyses, and assessing precision and accuracy [ 6 ]
An example of a Levey–Jennings chart with upper and lower limits of one and two times the standard deviation. A Levey–Jennings chart is a graph that quality control data is plotted on to give a visual indication whether a laboratory test is working well. The distance from the mean is measured in standard deviations.
Between each sample reading, the mobile phase and filter paper are changed to ensure the best outcomes. The spot capacity (analogous to peak capacity in HPLC) can be increased by developing the plate with two different solvents, using two-dimensional chromatography. [8] The procedure begins with development of a sample loaded plate with first ...
Data reconciliation is a technique that targets at correcting measurement errors that are due to measurement noise, i.e. random errors.From a statistical point of view the main assumption is that no systematic errors exist in the set of measurements, since they may bias the reconciliation results and reduce the robustness of the reconciliation.
For example, the ionic strength of the solution can have an effect on the activity coefficients of the analytes. [3] [4] The most common approach for accounting for matrix effects is to build a calibration curve using standard samples with known analyte concentration and which try to approximate the matrix of the sample as much as possible. [2]