NakedSignal

Change explorer · Chemistry

Point-of-care creatinine vs the central laboratory (device B)

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

Central lab chemistry analyser replaced by point of care device B: 345 paired results from a published study by Giachino et al. (2024), re-analysed by NakedSignal as if the study were one laboratory. At 1.2, 1.5 mg/dL, 46 results changed category after the change, against about 16 expected from repeat testing alone.

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

Chemistry

Creatinine, mg/dL

Central lab chemistry analyser replaced by Point of care device B. 345 paired results.

Compare it with the other comparisons in the explorer

Comparison line

The new system reads 5.1% lower than the old system on average. The comparison line has a slope of 1.111 (95% interval 0.98 to 1.241) and an intercept of -0.133.

Public data
Comparison line, creatinine (mg/dL)Comparison line with slope 1.111 (95% interval 0.98 to 1.241) and intercept -0.133, drawn against the line of no change. Decision limits drawn at 1.2, 1.5 mg/dL. Where the comparison line sits above the line of no change, the new system reads higher; below, lower.0.511.5211.51.21.5No changeComparison lineOld system, mg/dLNew system, mg/dL

Fig. 1. The comparison line against the line of no change, over the range of the decision limits (1.2, 1.5 mg/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 (1.2, 1.5 mg/dL)

Crossed after the change: 46

Expected from repeat testing alone: about 16

Grade and warnings

  • Re-test band: full (at least the protocol minimum of pairs).
  • Band half-width around each limit: 16%.
  • Results re-tested on data the band was not fitted to, median: 14%.
  • Share of the excess crossings caught on unseen data, comparison line and band together: 79%; comparison line alone: 2%. The excess is the crossings above what repeat testing alone would cause, so the share can exceed 100% or fall below zero.
  • Repeat-test imprecision: assumed, not measured at this site.

Source

Giachino M, Vetter B, Perone SA, Correia JC, Erkosar B, Heller O, Khanal VK, Lab B, Pataky Z, Poudel S, Rai M, Sharma SK (2024). Performance and usability of cardiometabolic point of care devices in Nepal: A prospective, quantitative, accuracy study. PLOS Glob Public Health. doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0003760 (opens in a new tab); PMC11449279 (opens in a new tab). Licence: CC BY 4.0 (opens in a new tab). 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 creatinine, Central lab chemistry analyser to Point of care device B
FieldValue
Paired results used345
Comparison line slope1.111111
Slope, 95% interval0.979921 to 1.241104
Comparison line intercept-0.133333
Mean difference, new minus old, as % of old-5.144
Decision limits (mg/dL)1.2, 1.5
Crossed after the change46
Expected from repeat testing alone15.58
Band half-width (%)16
Re-tested, unseen data, median (%)13.91
Re-tested, unseen data, range (%)13.04 to 14.2
Excess caught, line and band (%)78.99
Excess caught, line alone (%)1.64

Changing a system like this one?

Request a first site report