Roshan Davood, Das Kishor, Daniels Diarmuid, Pedlar Charles R, Catterson Paul, Newell John
School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
CÚRAM, SFI Research Centre for Medical Devices, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
PLoS One. 2025 May 23;20(5):e0323133. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0323133. eCollection 2025.
Clinical reference ranges are fundamental in medical diagnostics, offering critical benchmarks for interpreting laboratory test results. Adaptive reference ranges, in particular, are essential for personalised monitoring, as they enable the detection of abnormal values by accounting for individual variability over time. This paper compares two key approaches for generating adaptive reference ranges: the Z-score method and the linear mixed-effects modelling framework. Through simulation studies and real data applications, we provide practical insights into selecting the most appropriate methods for adaptive monitoring in personalised medicine and sport science. Our findings highlight the trade-offs between these approaches, with the Z-score method favouring specificity, while the linear mixed-effects model prioritises sensitivity and offers greater flexibility by incorporating population-level data, accommodating covariates, and effectively handling missing data.
临床参考范围在医学诊断中至关重要,为解释实验室检测结果提供关键基准。特别是适应性参考范围,对于个性化监测必不可少,因为它们能够通过考虑个体随时间的变异性来检测异常值。本文比较了生成适应性参考范围的两种关键方法:Z分数法和线性混合效应建模框架。通过模拟研究和实际数据应用,我们为在个性化医学和运动科学中选择最合适的适应性监测方法提供了实用见解。我们的研究结果突出了这些方法之间的权衡,Z分数法侧重于特异性,而线性混合效应模型则优先考虑敏感性,并通过纳入人群水平数据、容纳协变量和有效处理缺失数据提供更大的灵活性。