ISO
The 2015 Global Measurement Uncertainty Survey also collected many responses from the US. However, as CLIA is the dominant regulation in the US, the responses are quite different than the rest of the globe.
More than 550 laboratory professionals from over 85 countries around the world participated in the 2015 Global Measurement Uncertainty Survey. Here we present the results from the countries outside the US. What are labs thinking about measurement uncertainty? What are they doing? What are they reporting to clinicians? And what are clinicians doing with mu?
The 2015 Global Measurement Uncertainty generated dramatically different comments from US laboratories. Whereas ISO 15189 and measurement uncertainty is at least commonly known in the rest of the world, for many labs in the US, this survey was one of the first times they heard about the concept.
Here are more than 120 personal comments from the participants in our Global Measurement Uncertainty Survey. Some labs have no ambiguity about how they feel uncertainty. Here are the responses from all the countries outside the US (more than 85 countries from every civilized continent and region in the world). Believers, Beleaguered, Compliant, and Exasperated - just some of the categories of replies.
In the latest (2012) version of ISO 15189, a few key words were dropped from an important sentence about measurement uncertainty. In previous versions, uncertainty was required "where relevant and possible." In the new version, laboratories don't have a choice. They must calculate measurenment uncertainty, even when irrelevant and impractical. The only certainty now about measurement uncertainty is that ISO has made it a commandment. Thou shalt MU!