Table. 3.
The estimates of Passing–Bablok regression between the manual (x) and Andrew+-based sample preparation (y) methods
| Analyte | Estimate | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tacrolimus (n = 45) | Intercept | -0.6621 | -1.493 to 0.2000 |
| Slope | 1.103 | 1.000 to 1.213 | |
| Spearman’s ρ |
0.953 | 0.913 to 0.974 | |
| Sirolimus (n = 37) | Intercept | 0.2000 | -0.8571 to 1.183 |
| Slope | 1.0000 | 0.8280 to 1.149 | |
| Spearman’s ρ | 0.952 | 0.907 to 0.976 | |
| Everolimus (n = 36) | Intercept | 0.1778 | 0 to 0.5392 |
| Slope | 0.9751 | 0.8824 to 1.032 | |
| Spearman’s ρ | 0.975 | 0.950 to 0.988 | |
| Cyclosporine A (n = 44) | Intercept | -3.9830 | -14.07 to 4.396 |
| Slope | 0.9846 | 0.8929 to 1.129 | |
| Spearman’s ρ | 0.985 | 0.972 to 0.992 |
*Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.
Lab Med Online 2023;13:199~204 https://doi.org/10.47429/lmo.2023.13.3.199
© Lab Med Online