Both proficiency tests and collaborative trials provide information about the reproducibility standard deviation (SDR) of reported results from interlaboratory studies. Prima facie we would expect the former to provide greater SDR values on average. Collaborative trials require the participants to use a closely defined analytical procedure, while no such restriction applies in proficiency tests. Therefore we would expect the individual biases of different measurement principles, procedures and laboratories to contribute an extra uncertainty to the results of proficiency tests. In this paper we compare the SDR statistics derived from the determination of mycotoxins in foodstuffs. Overall there was little difference between the sources, with the implication that proficiency test results could, in this application sector, be used as a benchmark for uncertainty.

中文翻译：

---

来自能力验证和合作试验的再现性标准偏差 (SDR) 之间的比较：食品中的霉菌毒素

能力测试和合作试验都提供了有关实验室间研究报告结果的再现性标准偏差 (SDR) 的信息。从表面上看，我们希望前者平均提供更大的 SDR 值。合作试验要求参与者使用严格定义的分析程序，而在能力测试中则没有此类限制。因此，我们预计不同测量原则、程序和实验室的个体偏差会对能力验证的结果产生额外的不确定性。在本文中，我们比较了从食品中真菌毒素测定中得出的 SDR 统计数据。总体而言，来源之间几乎没有差异，这意味着在该应用领域，能力验证结果可以，