NakedSignal

Analyser-Change Registry

A shared record of what analyser changes do to patient results.

Every laboratory that changes an analyser runs a method comparison, and the next laboratory making the same change rarely sees it. The Registry pools them, by each laboratory’s choice, so a laboratory can see what the same change did elsewhere before it installs, and compare its own change with its peers afterwards. It is open for founding laboratories: no laboratory has contributed yet, and the public tier below is built from published studies.

01What it is

One record per change, pooled across laboratories

For each change a laboratory makes, the Registry keeps two things: the paired results the laboratory already produced for its own verification (the same sample measured on the old and the new system), and a short change record: old and new analyser, reagent and calibrator lot where known, software version, the month the new system went live, and the laboratory’s own decision limits.

From many such records it answers two questions no single laboratory can:

  • Before a change: what did this same pair of systems do to results at the decision limits in other laboratories?
  • After a change: how does our bias, and our count of results crossing each limit, compare with every laboratory that made the same or a similar change?

Holders of data from devices used in trials can contribute device changes in the same way, as a change record and aggregates computed on their own systems. Per-person data is designed to stay with the holder.

02Optional

How a laboratory contributes

Contributing is optional and separate from the report. The analyser-change report runs inside your laboratory and the files that leave it are designed to carry only aggregates (see security and data handling). Contributing to the Registry is a further step a laboratory can choose, by opting in on its order form, by signing a one-page accession form, or by sending the derived summary the change check shows (it reaches our mailbox by email, processed in the United States). It is never a condition of the report.

A contributing laboratory chooses one of two routes for each change:

  • Coded pairs. Your own staff remove every identifier and replace each sample number with a random code of which no key is kept. Each row then holds only the analyte, its unit, the old and the new value, the sample type and, if you choose, the care setting. This route is for the Registry only. A study with an EQA scheme takes no participant-level rows: the scheme runs the code and releases what it chooses.
  • Aggregates only. The totals the report’s program already produces in your laboratory, with small counts suppressed, and the change record. Send one set of totals per change: totals from overlapping data sent twice can reveal more than either set alone.

Never contributed: names, identity numbers, dates of birth, age, sex, the date or time of a draw, ward, requester, diagnosis, free text, or routine results outside the comparison.

Your data protection officer decides. If any row or field would be personal data in our hands, it is not contributed, and we agree a coarser version, such as aggregates only.

03In return

What a contributing laboratory receives

A peer benchmark

Its own bias and crossings at each decision limit, set against the pooled results for the same change, refreshed at least yearly. A peer cell is shown only when at least the steering group's minimum number of laboratories share it, so that no single laboratory's result can be read off it.

A forecast before its next change

On request, what other laboratories saw for the pair of systems it is considering, for a tender or an installation plan.

A credit on its own orders

Stated on the order form. Contributing is free in both directions.

Anonymity

Laboratories appear in outputs only as a code and a country, and are named only with their written consent.

Co-authorship

Offered to named staff on any scientific publication that uses their rows, under the journal’s authorship rules, with time to review each manuscript first.

The right to stop

A laboratory can stop at any time; its rows are then removed from the live tables and from any benchmark, publication or model work that starts afterwards.

04Founding laboratories

The first laboratories set the rules

The first laboratories to join become founding laboratories. Each will hold a seat on the Registry’s steering group, which will meet at least twice a year and decide, by majority, the minimum cell sizes (which it can raise but never lower), what a registry row contains, the publication plan, and requests from academic researchers. Founding laboratories are named as such only if they agree to it.

Ask for the founding terms

05Governance

Who holds it and what it is used for

The Registry is held by NakedSignal, which also chairs the steering group. A laboratory that contributes gives us a licence to use its rows, change records and summaries for this work, and what is already built keeps it after the laboratory stops. We use the pooled record to build and improve methods, software and models that size analyser changes, we own what we build, and we may license it to others. We never sell or license registry rows as rows, never try to identify a person, and never combine rows with other data for that purpose. Rows go only where the charter allows: to a company in our own group, to a new owner of our business, to a subcontractor bound by the same terms, or to a regulator reviewing our products.

If the business the Registry belongs to passes to another owner, the Registry, its rows and the licences laboratories gave would then pass to the new owner without a new consent, but only if the new owner agrees in writing to keep every promise on this page and in the charter, including the right to stop. We tell contributing laboratories within 30 days. Passing the Registry to a new owner in this way is not a sale of rows.

No rows are held yet. The charter sets how rows will be held once laboratories contribute: rows from the EU or EEA stored and processed there, rows from the UK in the UK or the EU or EEA, encrypted storage, and access limited to named staff with a record of each access. These are planned, not in place today. The full charter is sent on request.

06Public tier

The public tier, built from published studies

Public data

The public tier holds 34 method comparisons at 14 data sets, from 12 open-access studies, each analysed the way a registry record is: the bias and the count of results crossing each decision limit against repeat testing alone.

paired results
10,579
method comparisons
34
open-access studies
12
Public data

Analyser change explorer

Every comparison in the public tier, with its comparison line and crossings at each decision limit.

Changing an analyser, and willing to share the comparison?

Tell us which systems and when. We will send the founding terms and say what your laboratory would receive.