Editing Coefficient of variation (section)

===Laboratory measures of intra-assay and inter-assay CVs===
CV measures are often used as quality controls for quantitative laboratory [[assay]]s. While intra-assay and inter-assay CVs might be assumed to be calculated by simply averaging CV values across CV values for multiple samples within one assay or by averaging multiple inter-assay CV estimates, it has been suggested that these practices are incorrect and that a more complex computational process is required.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Rodbard|first=D|title=Statistical quality control and routine data processing for radioimmunoassays and immunoradiometric assays.|journal=Clinical Chemistry|date=October 1974|volume=20|issue=10|pages=1255–70|doi=10.1093/clinchem/20.10.1255|pmid=4370388|doi-access=free}}</ref> It has also been noted that CV values are not an ideal index of the certainty of a measurement when the number of replicates varies across samples − in this case standard error in percent is suggested to be superior.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite journal|last1=Eisenberg|first1=Dan|title=Improving qPCR telomere length assays: Controlling for well position effects increases statistical power|journal=American Journal of Human Biology|date=2015|doi=10.1002/ajhb.22690|pmid=25757675|volume=27|issue=4|pages=570–5|pmc=4478151}}</ref> If measurements do not have a natural zero point then the CV is not a valid measurement and alternative measures such as the [[intraclass correlation]] coefficient are recommended.<ref name="Eisenberg-CV-ICC">{{cite journal|last1=Eisenberg|first1=Dan T. A.|title=Telomere length measurement validity: the coefficient of variation is invalid and cannot be used to compare quantitative polymerase chain reaction and Southern blot telomere length measurement technique|journal=International Journal of Epidemiology|volume=45|issue=4|date=30 August 2016|pages=1295–1298|doi=10.1093/ije/dyw191|pmid=27581804|issn=0300-5771|doi-access=free}}</ref>