36 / 136
differs from what is
stated in the SMPR.
software under AB SCIEX company for the
estimation of S/N. According to my experience
these kind of software are very much optimistic and
will not allow comparability of results obtained on
different machines commercialized by different
companies.
The SMPR reports that the estimation of s0 done in
the proper way should lead to reliably calculate the
final MQL and MDL.
3. Are the definitions
specified in the
SMPR used and
applied appropriately
in the method? If no,
please indicate how
the terms are used.
Yes for many of them.
Still some problems in the correct calculation of
MDL and MQL and in the calculation of the
recovery that should be done on 7 independent
analysis for each concentration level tested (referred
to spiked or incurred blank samples) (and not 3
independent analysis for each concentration level as
done in this work)
4. Does the method,
as written, contain
all appropriate
precautions and
warnings related to
the method’s
reagents,
components,
instrumentation, or
method steps that
may be hazardous?
If no, please suggest
wording or option(s).
Yes
II.
Review of Supporting Information
1. Are the definitions
specified in the
SMPR used and
applied appropriately
in the supporting
documentation
(manuscripts,
method studies,
etc…)? If not, please
explain the
differences and if the
method is impacted
by the difference.
Yes although some confusion appears in the
manuscript especially in the chromatograms shown
in figures 7, 8, 9, 10. It is never specified if the
chromtagramas shown at 0 and 10 ppm levels refer
to spiked or incurred food samples….this could
make a big difference.