Talk:Reference range

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was adapted from Mikael Häggström (2014). "Reference ranges for estradiol, progesterone, luteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone during the menstrual cycle" (PDF). WikiJournal of Medicine. 1 (1). doi:10.15347/WJM/2014.001. ISSN 2002-4436. Wikidata Q44275619.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) after peer review (reviewer reports) under a CC0 license (2012).

Merging

I don't see any major difference between this article and Reference values. Propose merging them. Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's done now. Mikael Häggström (talk) 11:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Range/Interval

Is it as I understand it, that there is a difference between reference ranges and intervals? As far as I am aware, a reference range refers to the entire range of results, whilst reference intervals are the 95% confidence interval within the range. (2 standard deviations either side of the mean) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.80.123.40 (talk) 08:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, reference range is synonymous with reference interval. Mikael Häggström (talk) 11:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that people have used "interval" both ways. But I believe the more common interpretation is what Mikael Häggström said (synonymous intent). Compare also interval (mathematics) and range (statistics). Quercus solaris (talk) 02:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Correction

A thanks to Concordet for correcting the calculations of standard deviation and reference range limits! I've adjusted the numbers to conform to the proper method, but I'm not sure I've covered everything, so I recommend reading the article carefully and reporting any errors. Mikael Häggström (talk) 14:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]