PeptidePedia The community reference

Blind sampling: difference between revisions

Diff·revision 9 → 10·09:17, 5 Jan 2025

Difference between revision 9 and revision 10 of Blind sampling. 7 lines changed; the page grew by 892 bytes.

Revision 9 — 00:27, 20 Dec 2024
Chromatokid (talk)
clarify that a certificate is a claim by its issuer
3,929 bytes ±0
Revision 10 — 09:17, 5 Jan 2025
RegainRomilly (talk)
add the cost basis, since it shapes who submits
4,821 bytes +892
1{{Infobox concept1{{Infobox concept
2| name = Blind sampling2| name = Blind sampling
+3| subtitle = Sampling procedure
3| image = purity-hist.svg4| image = purity-hist.svg
4| caption = A distribution of submitted results describes the vials that were submitted. Whether it describes anything else depends entirely on how they were chosen.5| caption = A distribution of submitted results describes the vials that were submitted. Whether it describes anything else depends entirely on how they were chosen.
8| Purpose = To make a sample representative of a population9| Purpose = To make a sample representative of a population
9}}10}}
+11{{hatnote|For the documentary trail that a sample carries with it, see [[Chain of custody]]; for testing by a laboratory unconnected with the supplier, see [[Third-party testing]].}}
1012
11'''Blind sampling''' is the selection of material for testing under a procedure controlled by neither the party being tested nor the party commissioning the test. In a regulated setting it is what allows a result on a few units to support a statement about a whole lot: the units were drawn according to a written sampling plan, their identity was recorded, and the laboratory did not know whose material it was.{{r|iso17025}}{{r|gmp}} The sampling plan is part of the quality system rather than of the analysis, which is why an accredited laboratory can produce an impeccable result on an unrepresentative sample.13'''Blind sampling''' is the selection of material for testing under a procedure controlled by neither the party being tested nor the party commissioning the test. In a regulated setting it is what allows a result on a few units to support a statement about a whole lot: the units were drawn according to a written sampling plan, their identity was recorded, and the laboratory did not know whose material it was.{{r|iso17025}}{{r|gmp}} The sampling plan is part of the quality system rather than of the analysis, which is why an accredited laboratory can produce an impeccable result on an unrepresentative sample.
2325
24A blind procedure addresses the first two. Nothing addresses the third except collecting every result, which no open submission system does.26A blind procedure addresses the first two. Nothing addresses the third except collecting every result, which no open submission system does.
+27
+28== Why it is rare here ==
+29Blind sampling requires somebody to buy material anonymously, according to a plan they did not choose, and to pay for testing on it whatever the result. In a regulated supply chain the manufacturer's own quality unit does this because it is obliged to; a regulator does it because it has statutory authority and a budget.
+30
+31In the research-compound sector there is no obligation and no authority. The parties with a reason to test are purchasers, who are testing their own material because they want to know about their own material, and testing services, which test what is sent to them. Neither is positioned to run a sampling plan.{{r|reports}}
2532
26== References ==33== References ==