Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Harmonized guidelines for the use of recovery information in analytical measurement

Open access
Thompson, Michael, Ellison, Steven L R, Fajgelj, Aleš, Willetts, Paul, Wood, Roger·1999·Pure and Applied Chemistry

Abstract

Synopsis: ISO, IUPAC and AOAC INTERNATIONAL have co-operated to produce agreed protocols or guidelines on the "Design, Conduct and Interpretation of Method Performance Studies" [1] on the "Proficiency Testing of (Chemical) Analytical Laboratories" [2] and on "Internal Quality Control in Analytical Chemistry Laboratories" [3]. The Working Group that produced these protocols/guidelines was asked to prepare guidelines on the use of recovery information in analytical measurement. Such guidelines would have to outline minimum recommendations to laboratories producing analytical data on the internal quality control procedures to be employed. A draft of the guidelines was discussed at the Seventh International Symposium on the Harmonization of Quality Assurance Systems in Chemical Laboratory, sponsored by IUPAC/ISO/AOAC INTERNATIONAL, held in Orlando, USA, 4-5 September 1996. Proceedings from that Symposium are available [4]. The purpose of these guidelines is to outline the conceptual framework needed for considering those types of analysis where loss of analyte during the analytical procedure is inevitable. Certain questions cannot be satisfactorily addressed, and hence remain irreducibly complex, unless such a conceptual framework is established. The questions at issue involve (a) the validity of methods for estimating the recovery of the analyte from the matrix of the test material, and (b) whether the recovery estimate should be used to correct the raw data to produce the test result. The types of chemical analysis most affected by these considerations are those where an organic analyte is present at very low concentrations in a complex matrix. "Protocol for the Design, Conduct and Interpretation of Method Performance Studies", W. Horwitz, Pure Appl. Chem. 60, 855- 864 (1988), revised, 67, 331-343 (1995). "The International Harmonized Protocol for the Proficiency Testing of (Chemical) Analytical Laboratories", M. Thompson and R. Wood, Pure Appl. Chem. 65, 2123-2144 (1993). (Also published in J. AOAC International 76, 926-940 (1993). "Harmonized Guidelines for Internal Quality Control in Analytical Chemistry Laboratories", M. Thompson and R. Wood, Pure Appl. Chem. 67, 49-56 (1995). "Quality Assurance for Analytical Laboratories", edited M. Parkany, Royal Society of Chemistry, London, UK, 1996.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1351/pac199971020337

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Thompson, M., Ellison, S. L. R., Fajgelj, A., Willetts, P., & Wood, R.
Venue
Pure and Applied Chemistry
Published
1999-02-28
Volume
71
Issue
2
Pages
337-348
ISSN
  • 0033-4545 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3075
OpenAlex
W2031451860
Cited by
309
References
0
FWCI
7.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Harmonized guidelines for the use of recovery information in analytical measurement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1351/pac199971020337
The paper
Thompson, M., Ellison, S. L. R., Fajgelj, A., Willetts, P., & Wood, R. (1999). Harmonized guidelines for the use of recovery information in analytical measurement. Pure and Applied Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac199971020337

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.