ГОСТ ISO 17593—2011
[22] CLSI EP9-A2Method comparison and bias estimation using patient samples: Approved guideline, 2nd ed.
CLSI document ISBN 1-56238-472 4. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 940 West
Valley Road. Suite 1400. Wayne. PA 19087 — 1898 USA. 2002
[23] BLAND. J.M. and ALTMAN, D.G.. Statistical methods (or assessing agreement between two methods of clinical
measurement. Lancet. 1.1986. pp. 307—310
[24] LINNET, K.. Evaluation of regression procedures for methods comparison studies. CNn Chem. 1993. 39,
pp. 424—432
[25] STOCKL D.. DEWITT. K. and THIENPONT. L.M.. Validity ofllnear regression in method comparison studies: Is it
limited by the statistical model or the quality of the analytical input data? Clin Chem. 1998.44(11). pp. 2340—2346
[26] HENEGHAN.C.. ALONSO-COELLO, P.. GARCIA-ALAMINO. J.M.. PERERA. R.. MEATS. E. and GLAS2IOU. P.,
Self-monitoring oforal anticoagulation, a systematic review and meta-anatysis. The Lancet 2006; 367: p 404—411
[27] MENENDE2-JANDULA. B.. SOUTO. J.C.. OLIVER. A.. MONTSERRAT. I.. OUINTANA. M.. GICH. I., BONFILL. X.
and FONTCUBERTA. J.. Comparing self-management of oral anticoagulant therapy with clinic management: a
randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2005:142(1): pp. 1—10
[28] POLLER. L..etal.. Multicentre ISI calibration of two typesof РОС prothrombin time monitoring systems. BrJ Hae
matol. 2002, 116. pp. 844—850
[29] TRIPODI, A..etal., International collaborative study for the calibration of a proposed reference preparation for
thromboplastin, human recombinant, plain. Thromb Haemost. 1998: 79. pp. 439—445
[30] VAN DEN 8ESSELAAR. A.M. and BERTINA. R.M.. Multi-center study of thromboplastin calibration precision.
Influence of reagent species, composition and ISI. Thromb Hemost. 1993, 69. pp. 35— 40
[31] VAN DEN BESSELAAR. A M . Precision and Accuracy of the INR In oral anticoagulation control. Haemostasis
1996. 26 (Suppl). pp. 248—265
[32] VAN DEN BESSELAAR. A M., el al (editors). Thromboplastin Calibration and Oral Anticoagulant Control. Marlinus
Nijhoff Publishers. 1984. p. 109
[33] SCHEFFLER, B.. Algorithms for reagent carriers. Roche Diagnostics Mannheim
[34] STANKIWIC2. A.. Eight reagent lots comparison. Roche Diagnostics Indianapolis, internal data
[35] PLESCH. W.. etal. Evaluation ofthe new CoaguChek «mini» PT test strips inpatient’s hands. Haemostasis. 1998.
28 (suppl 2). p. 67
[36] ATTERMANN. J.. etal. Precision of patient’s measurements ofthe INR using a patient operated whole blood home
coagulometer. Thromb Res. 1998. 92. pp. 287—291
[37] ATTERMANN J. Precision of INR measured with a patient operated whole blood coagulometer. Thromb Res. 2003.
110. pp. 65—68
[38] PLESCH. W . HILL. J.. KIMPEL. P., SUCHY. A.. CARR. B.. NEWHART. A.. CHAN1ARANGKUL. V.. TRIPODI. A..
SLING ERLAND. R. and DIKKESCHEI. L.. Comparisonof INR Results of the CoaguChek S PT and CoaguChek Pro
PTn Test With International Reference Thromboplastins. Ann Hematol. 2002. 81 (Suppl 1). A65
[39] LADUCA. F..GUNNERMAN. T.. RUYBALID, R.. JACOBSON. A. and 2UCKER. M.. Precision of INR (International
Normalized Ratio) measurement using laboratory and point-of-care assays: Understanding the impact of system
influence on patient management. International Soc Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Birmingham UK. 2003. J
Thromb Haemost Supplement. 2003
[40] LADUCA. F.. GUNNERMAN. T.. RUYBALID. R.. JACOBSON. A. and 2UCKER. M.. Precision of INR (International
Normalized Ratio) measurement using laboratory and point-of-care assays: Understanding the Impact of system
Influence on patient management. Amer Assoc Clin Chem. Philadelphia PA. 2003. Clin Chem. 2003. 49. F-8
[41] TRIPODI. A.. CHAN TARANGKUL, V.. BRESSI. C. and MANNUCCI. P.. International Sensitivity Index calibration of
the near-patient testing prothrombin time monitor. ProTime. Am J Clin Path. 2003, 119, pp. 241—245
[42] VAN DEN BESSELAAR. A.M.P.H.. A comparison of INRs determined with a whole blood prothrombin device and
two IRP for thromboplastin. Thromb Haemost. 2000. 84. pp. 410—412
[43] SHIACH. C.. CAMPBELL. B.. POLLER. L.. KEOWN, M. and CHAUHAN. N.. Reliabilityof point-of-care prothrombin
time testing in a community clinic: a randomized crossover comparison with hospital laboratory testing, fir J He
matol. 2002. 119. pp. 330—375
[44] POLLER. L.. KEOWN. M.. CHAUHAN. N.. VAN DEN BESSELAAR. A.M.P.H., TRIPODI. A . SHIACH. C. and
JESPERSEN. J.. Reliability of INR from two point of care test systems: companson with conventional methods.
BMJ. 2003. p. 327
[45] DOUKETIS. J., LANE. A.. MILNE. J. and GINSBERG. J.. Accuracy of a portable international normalization ratio
monitor in outpatients receiving long-term oral anticoagulant therapy. Comparison with a laboratory reference
standard using clinically relevant criteria for agreement. Thromb Res. 1998. 92. pp. 11— 17
[46] EN 591:2001Instructions for use for in vitro diagnostic instruments for professional use
[47] JACKSON. S., BEREZNICKI. L. and PETERSON. G.. Accuracy, reproducibilityand clinical utilityofthe CoaguChek S
portable international normalized ratio monitor in an outpatient anticoagulation clinic. Ctm Lab Haem. 2004, 26. pp.
49—55
[48] PATSCH. M., CIMINI. C. and LADUCA. F., Performance evaluation of Protime3: Low volume prothrombin time (PT)
test for professional and patient self-testing applications. Anticoagulatton Forum. Washington DC 2001. J Thromb
Thrombol. 2001. 12. 112. E11
[49] Технические отчеты ВОЗ. номер 889. 1999. приложение 3
47