Design and Analysis of Gauge R&amp;R Studies

Burdick, Richard K.; Borror, Connie M.; Montgomery, Douglas C.

doi:10.1137/1.9780898718379

Cited by 144 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the shift of both measured values of the given appraiser is 2σ or higher, the interaction is already evaluated as statistically significant and hence its contribution is calculated independently. Increasing the size of interaction leads to a gradual reduction in the value of %AV and %EV, which is in line with the calculating relations of ANOVA method (Burdick, Borror & Montgomery, 2005). Table 3 and Figure 4 clearly show that the ANOVA method is much more sensitive in terms of the occurrence of interaction than the average and range method.…”

Section: Simulationsupporting

confidence: 80%

Influence of the Interaction Between Parts and Appraisers on the Results of Repeatability and Reproducibility Analysis

Plura

Klaput

2012

QIP Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Simulationsupporting

confidence: 80%

Influence of the Interaction Between Parts and Appraisers on the Results of Repeatability and Reproducibility Analysis

Plura

Klaput

2012

QIP Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Future work ought to compare and contrast what is presented here to single-variable methods already described in the literature and logistic regression models of quality as a function of more than two independent variables. In addition, we could consider alternate methods to evaluate classification errors according to Burdick et al (2005). Finally, the concept of similarity to imagine a response describing quality and pursue economic design will hopefully be employed in other interesting contexts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Similarity of Multivariate Methods to Establish Microarray Quality Control Standards

Jing

Chimka

2012

Quality Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes a multivariate method based on logistic regression that distinguishes between usable and low-quality digital image spots associated with DNA microarray data analysis. To create a response variable describing spot quality, the authors analyzed the similarity among decisions that were made with control charts applied to quality parameters established in the gene expression measurement literature.

show abstract

“…The purpose is to be able to extend the conclusions that are based on the sample of sonographers (or transducers) to all sonographers (or transducers). Depending whether there is sonographer-transducer interaction, two models (adapted from Ch7 of [14]) are introduced as follows.…”

Section: Randr Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Clinically Based QUS Phantom Study and Methodologies

Han

André

Erdman

et al. 2017

IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelect., Freq. Contr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility (R&R) of quantitative ultrasound (QUS) estimates, specifically attenuation coefficient (AC) and backscattering coefficient (BSC), using the same Siemens 3000 clinical ultrasound scanner. Additionally, the purpose of this work is to detail the measurement and analysis methodology. Repeatability is closeness of agreement between measures obtained with the same method under same conditions (same sonographer and same transducer) and reproducibility is closeness of agreement between measures obtained with the same method under different conditions (different sonographers and/or different transducers). Calibrated phantoms were scanned by two sonographers using two transducers in each session for multiple sessions over a period of four months. The phantom scans occurred as part of a clinical QUS liver study in human research participants spanning a spectrum of obesity and liver disease severity. The scanner was adjusted in each participant to obtain the highest quality liver B-mode images prior to acquiring data from the phantoms for which no scanner adjustments were made. The R&R were analyzed and estimated using the unweighted sums of squares ANOVA approach by applying two random effect models. The measurement variance caused by repeatability and reproducibility is small (AC: 2.4–3.2×10−4 [dB/cm-MHz]2; 10log10BSC: 0.23–0.27 dB2). The reproducibility variance is statistically significantly lower than the repeatability variance. The total R&R was not influenced by phantom properties over a wide range representing those found in liver in vivo.

show abstract

Design and Analysis of Gauge R&R Studies

Cited by 144 publications

References 0 publications

Influence of the Interaction Between Parts and Appraisers on the Results of Repeatability and Reproducibility Analysis

Influence of the Interaction Between Parts and Appraisers on the Results of Repeatability and Reproducibility Analysis

Similarity of Multivariate Methods to Establish Microarray Quality Control Standards

Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Clinically Based QUS Phantom Study and Methodologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About