EFLM database: 78 steps forward, 272 steps back

Posted by Sten Westgard, MS

The launch of the new EFLM database on biological variation has been greeted with fanfare and praise.

In the details, of course, there was an expected drop in the number of assays with accurate data. The main criticism of the 2014 Ricos goals was that the data was too old, the studies weren't standardized, etc. So the specifications for many analytes were incorrect.

The Ricos 2014 database was more than 350 analytes.

The EFLM 2019 database is just 78 analytes. You can see how they compare to other specifications here.

We are happy to see better specifications for the 78 analytes.  But in the meantime, while we wait for the EFLM database to catch up with better specifications for 272 analytes, what specifications should we be using?

We're still stuck using the same specifications we were complaining about 5 years ago, because there's nothing better we can do.