Posted by Sten Westgard, MSAs we write, the National Basketball Playoffs are underway. The home team for Westgard QC, the Milwaukee Bucks, just went down to defeat in the final game of a 7-game series.Those who follow basketball know that in a series like this, the teams basically alternate home court advantage. The Bucks went to Atlanta to play the Hawks for two game,s then the Hawks came to Milwaukee to play the Bucks for two games, etc. But while there is a home court advantage in the audience (which didn't work: both teams won away games), the courts in every stadium are the same. The basketball hoop in Atlanta is the same as the basketball hoop in Milwaukee. Why is that?Because the rules specify a consistent goal. The NBA has a rule book which states the precise size of the court, equipment and basket size. A basket, for example, "shall consist of a pressure-release NBA approved metal safety ring 18" in inside diameter with a white cord net 15" to 18" in length." Every stadium must comply with this rule. Likewise, there is a single standard for the basketball: "The National Basketball Association (NBA) allows only one official ball:
The ball must be the official NBA game ball manufactured by Spalding.
The ball is orange in color, 29.5 inches in circumference and weighs 22
ounces (size 7). It must also be inflated to between 7.5 and 8.5 pounds
per square inch."Sorry for the long prologue. But wouldn't it be nice if labs were the same?
-----
Posted by Sten Westgard, MSWhat's in a Sigma-metric of 3, 6, or even 11?Sigma-metrics provide a useful way of classifying method performance and relating that performance to the QC that is necessary to “verify the attainment of the intended quality of test results,” which is a requirement of ISO 15189. But, Sigma-metrics are not foolproof. Does that bother you?Maybe it's better if we frame this by referencing the 1984 cult film, This is Spinal Tap.
-----
Posted by Sten Westgard, MSAlan Greenspan gave some instantly notorious testimony to the US Congress recently:“I was right 70 percent of the time, but I was wrong 30 percent of the
time,” I'm not sure what was more concerning; the fact that he admitted that almost a third of the time he was wrong, or that he clearly believes that being right only 70% of the time was acceptable. Clearly, for a man once called "The Oracle" and Maestro, he was lowering the bar on the standards for judging him.Testimony like that raises some instant questions:
If Alan Greenspan was responsible for setting the direction of the
world's greatest economy, is a 30% error rate acceptable?
If Alan Greenspan was an airline, would you fly him?
If Alan Greenspan was a core laboratory test, would you buy the instrument?
If Alan Greenspan was a glucose meter, would you buy the device?
-----
Posted by Sten Westgard, MSWe've probably never met before. Maybe you're a reader of this blog. Or a visitor to the website, like the tens of thousands of laboratory professionals who visit the website every month, accessing hundreds of free articles, lessons, and examples of quality control. Or perhaps you're one of the thousands who have taken our online courses or purchased and read our many books and reference manuals. But it is highly probable that we have never talked, emailed, or had a discussion with each other.And maybe that's not good.
-----