Select a series of different tissues (as diverse as possible) and run half with your VIP and the other half with the Peloris. Do not identify which processor was used for each block/section and give the sections to as many pathologists in unidentified pairs as a "blind test" They will not know how each block was processed. The referees will have only two choices in their selection: 1- one section was better than the other within the pair (V or P), or 2 both were the same = of equal quality (S). Analyze the results with the chi-square test where "S" includes V and P for a theoretical frequency of (S+P) = (S+V) = 1.00 and for each is the theoreticla frequency is 0.5 Compare the theoretical distribution with the results obtained from the referees. By the way, the Peloris the existing "official" validations were done in Australia by the manufacturers of the original instrument (VisionBioSystems) and were never externally corroborated. René J.
--- On Wed, 9/28/11, Hutton, Allison <ahut...@dh.org> wrote: From: Hutton, Allison <ahut...@dh.org> Subject: [Histonet] peloris validation To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu Date: Wednesday, September 28, 2011, 11:05 AM We are considering purchasing a Peloris II. We are unsure of the validation process of a processor, having not had to replace one in 15+ years. We currently have 2 VIPs. For those of you using the Peloris, How did you validate? how many runs, and what type of tissue did you use? Thank you for your in put. Allison _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
