NakedSignal

Change explorer · Haematology and immunology

Point-of-care haemoglobin meter B vs the laboratory, central laboratory setting

Public dataA public method-comparison deposit, not a laboratory's data. Systems are described generically; the source names them.

Laboratory haematology analyser (reference) replaced by point of care haemoglobin meter B (central laboratory setting): 56 paired results from a published study by Huub Gelderblom (2016), re-analysed by NakedSignal as if the study were one laboratory. At 8, 12, 13 g/dL, 16 results changed category after the change, against about 32 expected from repeat testing alone. Here the change moved fewer results than repeat testing would, and the report says so.

run 25 September 2026 · config 6eb23df45893 · run file sha256 5586cd892ef1

Haematology and immunology

Haemoglobin, g/dL

Laboratory haematology analyser (reference) replaced by Point of care haemoglobin meter B (central laboratory setting). 56 paired results.

Compare it with the other comparisons in the explorer

Comparison line

The new system reads 12.5% lower than the old system on average. The comparison line has a slope of 1.131 (95% interval 1 to 1.369) and an intercept of -2.26.

Public data
Comparison line, haemoglobin (g/dL)Comparison line with slope 1.131 (95% interval 1 to 1.369) and intercept -2.26, drawn against the line of no change. Decision limits drawn at 8, 12, 13 g/dL. Where the comparison line sits above the line of no change, the new system reads higher; below, lower.510155101581213No changeComparison lineOld system, g/dLNew system, g/dL

Fig. 1. The comparison line against the line of no change, over the range of the decision limits (8, 12, 13 g/dL). Dots mark where each line meets each limit; the gap between them is the bias at that limit.

run 25 September 2026 · config 6eb23df45893 · run file sha256 5586cd892ef1

Crossing each limit

Results that moved across a decision limit when the new system replaced the old, against the number repeat testing on one unchanged system would move. The program reports the count across all limits together.

All decision limits together (8, 12, 13 g/dL)

Crossed after the change: 16

Expected from repeat testing alone: about 32

Grade and warnings

  • Re-test band: Indicative: 56 pairs, below the 100-pair protocol minimum.
  • Band half-width around each limit: 1.38%.
  • Results re-tested on data the band was not fitted to, median: 14%.
  • Repeat-test imprecision: measured, precision file (patient-sample replicates, 5 per sample), the larger of the two systems.
  • Warning from the program: The change moved fewer than 5 more people across a line than repeat testing alone would; excess caught is not meaningful here.

Source

Data: Huub Gelderblom (2016). Performance characteristics of three point of care hemoglobin meters in Durban-2.xlsx. figshare. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.3119449 (opens in a new tab). Licence: CC BY 4.0 (opens in a new tab). Supplement to Jaggernath M, Naicker R, Madurai S, Brockman MA, Ndung'u T, Gelderblom HC (2016). PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152184 (opens in a new tab); PMC4821624 (opens in a new tab) (title on the source page; it names the instruments). Changes: Paired results re-analysed by NakedSignal's program; instruments described generically; only derived results are shown. The deposit names the systems.

Show the numbers
All values for haemoglobin, Laboratory haematology analyser (reference) to Point of care haemoglobin meter B
FieldValue
Paired results used56
Comparison line slope1.131007
Slope, 95% interval1 to 1.368586
Comparison line intercept-2.25964
Mean difference, new minus old, as % of old-12.5
Decision limits (g/dL)8, 12, 13
Crossed after the change16
Expected from repeat testing alone32.36
Band half-width (%)1.38
Re-tested, unseen data, median (%)14.29
Re-tested, unseen data, range (%)8.93 to 17.86
Excess caught, line and band (%)none
Excess caught, line alone (%)none

Changing a system like this one?

Request a first site report