Scores estimating test

Tables I and II present the results of the Work Group discussions for the screening and site-specific level models, respectively. The assessment in these tables is based on a ranking scale between 0 and 100 0 indicates situations where no testing has been attempted and 100 identifies areas where extensive testing has been completed with sufficient post-audits to validate the predictive capability of relevant models. The scores can also be interpreted to mean the extent to which additional field testing would improve our understanding of how well the models represent natural systems. It is important to note that the scores do not indicate model accuracy per se they show the degree to which current field testing has been able to identify or estimate model accuracy.

En numbers are used when the assigned value has been produced by a reference laboratory, which has provided an estimate of the expanded uncertainty. This scoring method also requires a valid estimate of the expanded uncertainty for each participant s result. A score of En < 1 is considered satisfactory. The acceptability criterion is different from that used for z-, z - or zeta-scores as En numbers are calculated using expanded uncertainties. However, the En number is equal to zeta/2 if a coverage factor of 2 is used to calculate the expanded uncertainties (see Chapter 6, Section 6.3.6). En numbers are not normally used by proficiency testing scheme providers but are often used in calibration studies. 

The first stage in producing a score from a result x (a single measurement of analyte concentration in a test material) is to obtain an estimate of the bias, thus ... 

In 1960, the highest of three pre-test practice trials served as the baseline value for the Number Facility (NF) test and we continued with this definition in 1961. Subjects continued to improve, however, even while under the influence of BZ and by the time they returned to clinical normalcy, their NF scores were usually 10-20% higher than at the start. It was obvious that this sort of improvement could confound estimates of the true time of recovery. 

The volunteer, after recovery, estimates the degree to which each symptom was present. (Form can only be completed when subject is reasonably oriented.) Scoring is [0] if symptom is absent, [1] if present but mild and [2] if marked. Items were chosen from those frequently mentioned in post-test write-ups by a large sample of previous volunteers who had received a belladonnoid drug. 

If no suitable reference materials are available, the determination of trae-ness can also be carried out via inter-laboratoiy studies. The assigned value of the interlaboratoiy test sample, determined by the provider, is used as an estimate for the trae value. The organizers of such studies provide the participating laboratories with a report showing the score of each participant. 

AMC (2000) How to combine proficiency test results with your own uncertainty estimate - the zeta score. AMC Technical Brief No. 2 (Nov 2000). Analytical Methods Committee, Royal Society of Chemistry, London, 2 pp. 

In addition, while hundreds of chemicals have been found to cause carcinogenic effects in laboratory animals, definite evidence of human cardnogenidty exists for only a score or more (lARC, 1982). At present, therefore, estimates of the cardnogenidty of most chemicals for man must be based largely on tests in laboratory animals, supported by andllaiy data from other types of bioassays and from knowledge of the relationship between molecular structure and biological activity. 

Subjective effects of the experimental drugs were estimated from scores on several standardized tests and computer-delivered 100-mm visual analog scales that measured drug symptoms, strength and liking. The 100-mm scale was anchored with the terms not at all (0 mm) and extremely (100 mm). The subjects rated subjective effects at about the same times of the pupillary measures. 

The principal measure taken is the animal s latency to cross to the dark compartment at T2. This score provides an estimate of the animal s retention of the shock received at Tl. The latencies measured at T2 have a 180 second cut-off. The scores in the control group are therefore abnormally distributed because of the presence of numerous ceiling scores. It is therefore essential to apply non-parametric statistics, for example the Mann-Whitney U-test, to analyze the data. 

The running time score provides a measure of the intrinsic effects of the test substance on motor performance, and thereby permits an estimate of the selectivity of a drug effect on working memory . A test substance which markedly prolongs running time may also cause an increase in errors simply because the animal has to retain the required information (which arms were visited) over a longer period time. 

---