123 / 198
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.
2. Is there information
demonstrating that the
method meets the SMPR
Method Performance
Requirements using the
Reference Materials stated in
the SMPR? If not, then
specify what is missing and
how this impacts
demonstration of
performance of the method.
Yes. There is ample data to support the method requirements for reproducibility and
accuracy.
3. Is there information
demonstrating that the
method performs within the
SMPR Method Performance
Requirements using the
Reference Materials stated in
the SMPR? If not, then
specify what is missing and
how this impacts
demonstration of method
performance.
Yes. The method performed within requirements for the three SRM's referenced in the
SMPR.
4. Is there information
demonstrating that the
method performs within the
SMPR Method Performance
REquirements table
specifications for all analytes
in the SMPR applicability
statement? If not, please
specify what is missing and
whether or not the method's
applicability should be
modified.
Yes. There was one product that gave a slightly higher result than that for the upper
limit for recovery %, but this was most likely due to the non-uniformity of the product.
1. Based on the supporting
information, were there any
additional steps in the
evaluation of the method that
indicated the need for any
additional precautionary
statements in the method?
There was an indication by the authors of the method that the recovery specifications
from the SMPR were more stringent than those found in AOAC dietary supplement
guidelines.