Difference between revisions of "User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel9"

From LIMSWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(152 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
This next section considers the difficulty of trying to categorize laboratories and provides a recommended framework for doing just that.
<div class="nonumtoc">__TOC__</div>
{{ombox
| type      = notice
| style    = width: 960px;
| text      = This is sublevel9 of my sandbox, where I play with features and test MediaWiki code. If you wish to leave a comment for me, please see [[User_talk:Shawndouglas|my discussion page]] instead.<p></p>
}}


<div align="center">-----Return to [[LII:The Laboratories of Our Lives: Labs, Labs Everywhere!|the beginning]] of this guide-----</div>
==Sandbox begins below==
__TOC__


==2. A framework for the laboratories in our lives==
[[File:|right|500px]]
When thinking casually about laboratories, clinical diagnostic and chemistry labs likely spring to mind. But when the layman is pressed to name more laboratory types than that, the task becomes increasingly difficult. The next logical jump is to think about all the different types of scientific study that might have a laboratory associated with it: how about biology, physics, geology, and engineering? That list could get rather long, actually, and it may be a little like throwing darts blindfolded given the increasingly interdisciplinary nature of scientific research today.


So how do we better visualize how and where laboratories intersect our lives? It helps to build a framework that all laboratories could find a home within.
'''Title''': ''LIMS Selection Guide for Materials Testing Laboratories''


Below (Fig. 1) is a diagrammatic expression of one method of organizing laboratories of the world. The idea behind the framework is that, starting from the top, you could name a specific laboratory and be able to put it somewhere within the framework. For example:
'''Edition''': First Edition


* The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's mobile forensics laboratory<ref name="StephensInside15">{{cite web |url=http://www.kctv5.com/story/28266161/inside-look-at-fbis-new-mobile-forensics-lab |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150806100647/http://www.kctv5.com/story/28266161/inside-look-at-fbis-new-mobile-forensics-lab |title=Inside look at FBI's new mobile forensics lab |author=Stephens, B. |work=KCTV5 News |publisher=Gannaway Web Holdings, LLC |date=04 March 2015 |archivedate=06 August 2015 |accessdate=28 June 2022}}</ref> would fall under Government > Public > Analytical > Dry > Mobile.  
'''Author for citation''': Shawn E. Douglas


* An engineering design laboratory based within a for-profit car manufacturing company would fall under Private > Internal Customer > Research / Design > Dry > Fixed.
'''License for content''': [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International]
 
* A chemistry laboratory housed in a secondary school in Germany would fall under Academic > Public > Teaching > Secondary > Wet > Fixed.
 
 
[[File:Laboratory types diagram.png|1500px]]
{{clear}}
{|
| STYLE="vertical-align:top;"|
{| border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="1500px"
|-
  | style="background-color:white; padding-left:10px; padding-right:10px;"| <blockquote>'''Figure 1.''' A diagrammatic representation of laboratory types using both client type and function as the key organizational elements</blockquote>
|-
|}
|}
 
The original inspiration for this diagram came from Jain and Rao's attempt to diagram Indian diagnostic laboratories in 2015.<ref name="JainMedical15">{{cite journal |title=Medical diagnostic laboratories provisioning of services in India |journal=CHRISMED Journal of Health and Research |author=Jain, R.; Rao, B. |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=19–31 |year=2015 |doi=10.4103/2348-3334.149340}}</ref> While their diagram focused entirely on the clinical sphere of laboratories, it was easy to envision expanding upon their work to express laboratories of all types. Additional inspiration came from KlingStubbins' architecture textbook ''Sustainable Design of Research Laboratories: Planning, Design, and Operation''<ref name="KlingstubbinsSustainable10">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yZQhTvvVD7sC&pg=PA18 |title=Sustainable Design of Research Laboratories: Planning, Design, and Operation |author=KlingStubbins |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |year=2010 |pages=17–18 |isbn=9780470915967 |accessdate=28 June 2022}}</ref>, which lists several methods for organizing types of laboratories; Daniel D. Watch's ''Building Type Basics for Research Laboratories''<ref name="WatchBuilding01">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_EGpDgUNppIC&pg=PA37 |chapter=Chapter 2: Laboratory Types |title=Building Type Basics for Research Laboratories |author=Watch, D.D. |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |year=2001 |pages=37–99 |isbn=9780471217572 |accessdate=28 June 2022}}</ref>; and Walter Hain's ''Laboratories: A Briefing and Design Guide''.<ref name="HainLab03">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HPB4AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA2 |title=Laboratories: A Briefing and Design Guide |author=Hain, W. |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2003 |pages=2–5 |isbn=9781135822941 |accessdate=28 June 2022}}</ref>
 
* '''Blue chalk''': Sector/client-type (private/non-profit, government, or academic)
* '''Hot green''': Customer (internal/external) or partnership/role (public, private, or public-private)
* '''Sea green''': Function (analytical, calibration, QA/QC and compliance, research/design, or teaching)
* '''Banana yellow''': Sub-functions (wet/dry, secondary, collegiate, or graduate)
* '''Dodger blue''': Mobility (fixed or mobile)
 
 
The benefit of this diagrammatic approach—with sector or "client type" (i.e. private/non-profit, government, or academic) as a starting point—becomes more apparent when we start considering the other two methods we could use to categorize laboratories, as described by KlingStubbins ''et al.'': by science and by function. Organizing by science quickly becomes problematic, emphasizes KlingStubbins<ref name="KlingstubbinsSustainable10" />:
 
<blockquote>Gone are the days when the division was as simple as biology and chemistry. New science fields emerge rapidly now and the lines between the sciences are blurred. A list based on science types would include not just biology and chemistry, but biochemistry, biophysics, electronics, electrophysiology, genetics, metrology, nanotechnology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, physics, and so on.</blockquote>


As for function, we can look at what type of activity is primary to the lab. Is the lab designed to teach students, function as a base for research, provide quality control functions, calibrate equipment, act as a routine analytical station, or perform more than one of these tasks? Another benefit of looking at labs by function is it helps with our organization of labs within industry (discussed in the next section) by ''what they do''. For example, we don't have a "manufacturing lab"; rather, we have a laboratory in a manufacturing company—perhaps making cosmetics—that serves a particular function, whether its quality control or research and development (R&D). This line of thinking has utility, but upon closer inspection, we discover that we need to also look further up the chain at who's running it.
'''Publication date''': ??? 2023


As such, we realize these functions can be integrated with client type to provide a more complete framework. Why? When we look at laboratories by science type—particularly when inspecting newer fields of science— we realize 1. they are often interdisciplinary (e.g., [[molecular diagnostics]] integrating molecular biology with clinical chemistry) and 2. they can serve two different functions within the same science (e.g., a diagnostic [[cytopathology]] lab vs. a teaching cytopathology lab). Rather than build a massively complex chart of science types, with numerous intersections and tangled webs, it seems more straightforward to look at laboratories by client type and then function, following from the architectural viewpoints presented by KlingStubbins ''et al.'' With that framework firmly in place, we can better organize an examination of where labs can be found and what roles they function under.


However, this doesn't mean looking at laboratories by science is entirely fruitless. But rather than focus directly on the sciences, why not look at the industries employing laboratory science? While there is crossover between industries (e.g., the cosmetic and petrochemical industries both lean on various chemical sciences), we can extend from the previous diagram (or work in parallel with it) and paint a broader picture of just how prevalent laboratories are in our life.
Description goes here...


In the next section, we look at the private, government, and academic labs in various industries (client type); provide real-life examples of labs and their specific tests; and discuss the various activities and sciences (i.e., functions) performed in them.
The table of contents for ''LIMS Selection Guide for Materials Testing Laboratories'' is as follows:


<div align="center">-----Go to [[LII:The Laboratories of Our Lives: Labs, Labs Everywhere!/Labs by industry: Part 1|the next chapter]] of this guide-----</div>
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel10|1. Introduction to materials and materials testing laboratories]]
::1.1 Materials testing labs, then and now
:::1.1.1 Materials testing 2.0
::1.2 Industries, products, and raw materials
::1.3 Laboratory roles and activities in the industry
:::1.3.1 R&D roles and activities
:::1.3.2 Pre-manufacturing and manufacturing roles and activities
:::1.3.3 Post-production quality control and regulatory roles and activities


==References==
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel11|2. Standards, regulations, and test methods affecting materials testing labs]]
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}
::2.1 Globally recognized materials manufacturing standards
:::2.1.1 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) materials standards
:::2.1.2 ASTM International Volume 15.04
:::2.1.3 Canadian Standards Association (CSA) A3000 series
:::2.1.4 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 10993
:::2.1.5 Metal Powder Industries Federation (MPIF) Standard 35 family
::2.2 Regulations and laws around the world
:::2.2.1 21 CFR Part 175 and 176 - United States
:::2.2.2 Building Standard Law - Japan
:::2.2.3 The Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1988 - United Kingdom
:::2.2.4 National Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Measure 2011 - Australia
:::2.2.5 Surface Coating Materials Regulations (SOR/2016-193) - Canada
::2.3 Standardized test methods for materials
::2.4 Materials laboratory accreditation
:::2.4.1 A note about engineering and construction materials testing


==Citation information for this chapter==
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel12|3. Choosing laboratory informatics software for your materials testing lab]]
'''Chapter''': 2. A framework for the laboratories in our lives
::3.1 Evaluation and selection
:::3.1.1 Technology considerations
::::3.1.1.1 Laboratory informatics options
:::3.1.2 Features and functions
::::3.1.2.1 Base features
::::3.1.2.2 Specialty features
:::3.1.3 Cybersecurity considerations
:::3.1.4 Regulatory compliance considerations
:::3.1.5 System flexibility
:::3.1.6 Cost considerations
::3.2 Implementation
:::3.2.1 Internal and external integrations
::3.3 MSW, updates, and other contracted services
::3.4 How a user requirements specification fits into the entire process (LIMSpec)


'''Title''': ''The Laboratories of Our Lives: Labs, Labs Everywhere!''
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel13|4. Resources for selecting and implementing informatics solutions]]
::4.1 LIMS vendors
::4.2 Consultants
::4.3 Professional
:::4.3.1 Trade organizations
:::4.3.2 Conferences and trade shows
::4.4 LIMSpec


'''Edition''': Second edition
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel14|5. Taking the next step]]
 
::5.1 Conduct initial research into a specification document tailored to your lab's needs
'''Author for citation''': Shawn E. Douglas
::5.2 Issue some of the specification as part of a request for information (RFI)
 
::5.3 Respond to or open dialogue with vendors
'''License for content''': [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International]
:::5.3.1 The value of demonstrations
::5.4 Finalize the requirements specification and choose a vendor


'''Publication date''': July 2022
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel15|6. Closing remarks]]


<!--Place all category tags here-->
:[[User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel16|Appendix 1. Blank LIMSpec template for manufacturing labs]]
::A1. Introduction and methodology
::A2. Primary laboratory workflow
::A3. Maintaining laboratory workflow and operations
::A4. Specialty laboratory functions
::A5. Technology and performance improvements
::A6. Security and integrity of systems and operations
::A7. Putting those requirements to practical use and caveats
::A8. LIMSpec in Microsoft Word format

Latest revision as of 23:14, 20 September 2023

This is sublevel9 of my sandbox, where I play with features and test MediaWiki code. If you wish to leave a comment for me, please see my discussion page instead.

Sandbox begins below

[[File:|right|500px]]

Title: LIMS Selection Guide for Materials Testing Laboratories

Edition: First Edition

Author for citation: Shawn E. Douglas

License for content: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

Publication date: ??? 2023


Description goes here...

The table of contents for LIMS Selection Guide for Materials Testing Laboratories is as follows:

1. Introduction to materials and materials testing laboratories
1.1 Materials testing labs, then and now
1.1.1 Materials testing 2.0
1.2 Industries, products, and raw materials
1.3 Laboratory roles and activities in the industry
1.3.1 R&D roles and activities
1.3.2 Pre-manufacturing and manufacturing roles and activities
1.3.3 Post-production quality control and regulatory roles and activities
2. Standards, regulations, and test methods affecting materials testing labs
2.1 Globally recognized materials manufacturing standards
2.1.1 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) materials standards
2.1.2 ASTM International Volume 15.04
2.1.3 Canadian Standards Association (CSA) A3000 series
2.1.4 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 10993
2.1.5 Metal Powder Industries Federation (MPIF) Standard 35 family
2.2 Regulations and laws around the world
2.2.1 21 CFR Part 175 and 176 - United States
2.2.2 Building Standard Law - Japan
2.2.3 The Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1988 - United Kingdom
2.2.4 National Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Measure 2011 - Australia
2.2.5 Surface Coating Materials Regulations (SOR/2016-193) - Canada
2.3 Standardized test methods for materials
2.4 Materials laboratory accreditation
2.4.1 A note about engineering and construction materials testing
3. Choosing laboratory informatics software for your materials testing lab
3.1 Evaluation and selection
3.1.1 Technology considerations
3.1.1.1 Laboratory informatics options
3.1.2 Features and functions
3.1.2.1 Base features
3.1.2.2 Specialty features
3.1.3 Cybersecurity considerations
3.1.4 Regulatory compliance considerations
3.1.5 System flexibility
3.1.6 Cost considerations
3.2 Implementation
3.2.1 Internal and external integrations
3.3 MSW, updates, and other contracted services
3.4 How a user requirements specification fits into the entire process (LIMSpec)
4. Resources for selecting and implementing informatics solutions
4.1 LIMS vendors
4.2 Consultants
4.3 Professional
4.3.1 Trade organizations
4.3.2 Conferences and trade shows
4.4 LIMSpec
5. Taking the next step
5.1 Conduct initial research into a specification document tailored to your lab's needs
5.2 Issue some of the specification as part of a request for information (RFI)
5.3 Respond to or open dialogue with vendors
5.3.1 The value of demonstrations
5.4 Finalize the requirements specification and choose a vendor
6. Closing remarks
Appendix 1. Blank LIMSpec template for manufacturing labs
A1. Introduction and methodology
A2. Primary laboratory workflow
A3. Maintaining laboratory workflow and operations
A4. Specialty laboratory functions
A5. Technology and performance improvements
A6. Security and integrity of systems and operations
A7. Putting those requirements to practical use and caveats
A8. LIMSpec in Microsoft Word format
Retrieved from "https://www.limswiki.org/index.php?title=User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel9&oldid=53063"