| Open Letter to CLSI |
| Written by James O. Westgard, PhD | |||
|
Numerous CLSI committees are formulating the standards for "QC for the Future" right now. In light of recent evidence that analytical quality is not as good as most assumed, this is an open appeal to those decision-makers and deciders all across the country to remember that statistical QC is a critical tool for the laboratory. Please Login (at right) or Register to view article
|
Member Login
What's New

Quality Requirments and Standards
- The Quality of Diabetes Testing 2011
- Traceability, Harmonization and Standardization: Why It Matters
- A Dark Secret about the Safety of Medical Devices
- What's the Right Goal?
- Quality of HbA1c, 2011, Part 2
- Quality of HbA1c, 2011
- The Quality Fade
- Quality of Blood Glucose Meters, 2010
- FDA hears concerns on Blood Glucose Meters
- HbA1c in 2010, Part XI
- HbA1c in 2010, Part X
- What's the Q of D? Vitamin D Performance Requirements
- Quality Requirements: The Debate heats up!
- HbA1c for screening and diagnosis of diabetes?
- Need for a System of Quality Standards
- Why Not Evidence-Based Method Specifications?
- Good Data Wanted - Bad Data Should Not Apply (The STARD Initiative)
- "The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth"
- Open Letter to CLSI
- What is the Laboratory's Core Competency?


