DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1065/espr2000.12.049 --- Traceability issues are of increasing concern in all fields where chemical measurements form the basis for decisions. The concepts of accuracy and traceability as applied to environmental analysis are, however, still prone to misunderstandings, which has been recently illustrated by controversial discussions among the analytical community with respect to accuracy and traceability issues in the area of speciation analysis. Analytical techniques used for the determination of chemical species (speciation analysis) are generally based on a succession of steps (e.g. extraction, derivatisation, separation, detection) which are all prone to various sources of systematic errors. Many speciation measurement techniques have been studied within the last decade through interlaboratory studies and certification of reference materials. These collaborative efforts have been understood as being directed towards strive for accuracy (trueness and precision). It has been recognised recently that the achievements actually enabled mostly to establish reference points (e.g. certified values in reference materials) which does not necessarily correspond to ´´true values´´ but rather offer a mean for laboratories to compare their data internationally and, hence, achieve traceability. This ambiguity still generates confusion and misunderstandings among the scientific community. This communication discusses this issue, focusing on analytical measurements only. Extending discussions on general traceability issues would imply an examination of steps prior to laboratory work (sampling, storage, etc.) which is beyond the scope of this contribution.measurements form the basis for decisions. The concepts of accuracy and traceability as applied to environmental analysis are, however, still prone to misunderstandings, which has been recently illustrated by controversial discussions among the analytical community with respect to accuracy and traceability issues in the area of speciation analysis. Analytical techniques used for the determination of chemical species (speciation analysis) are generally based on a succession of steps (e.g. extraction, derivatisation, separation, detection) which are all prone to various sources of systematic errors. Many speciation measurement techniques have been studied within the last decade through interlaboratory studies and certification of reference materials. These collaborative efforts have been understood as being directed towards strive for accuracy (trueness and precision). It has been recognised recently that the achievements actually enabled mostly to establish reference points (e.g. certified values in reference materials) which does not necessarily correspond to ´´true values´´ but rather offer a mean for laboratories to compare their data internationally and, hence, achieve traceability. This ambiguity still generates confusion and misunderstandings among the scientific community. This communication discusses this issue, focusing on analytical measurements only. Extending discussions on general traceability issues would imply an examination of steps prior to laboratory work (sampling, storage, etc.), which is beyond the scope of this contribution. |
