Compare Methods and Platforms
Comparisons are only useful if they state the trade-off honestly. Each page below names where the alternative wins, because a comparison that concludes “ours is better in every dimension” is not a comparison.
Method comparisons
| Comparison | The real question |
|---|---|
| FICT vs lateral flow | Do you need a measurement, or a judgement? |
| FICT vs ELISA | Latency against batch precision and cost |
| FICT vs PCR | Protein or genome, and which detection window applies |
| FICT vs chemiluminescence | Detection limit against turnaround, and where the decision limit sits |
Setting and equipment
| Page | The real question |
|---|---|
| In-house vs reference laboratory | What does the wait cost, and which tests can wait |
| FIA680 vs FIA880 | Peak concurrent demand, not brochure throughput |
| Analyzer selection matrix | Four weighted variables, including whether you need an analyzer at all |
| Migibio vs alternatives | Why there is no competitor scoreboard, and what to ask instead |
How to run a comparison you can defend
- Ask every vendor for the same items in writing — LoD with method, LoQ with CV target, precision at decision concentrations, reference intervals with sample size.
- Run the same samples on each platform: one low, one mid, one high.
- Compare with bias and limits of agreement, not correlation.
- Check the reference interval on the demonstration unit.
- Score the workflow, not only the instrument.
The Author’s Take
Position. The most persuasive page in a comparison section is the one that concedes ground — and it is also the one competitors find hardest to answer.
Reasoning. Buyers have read enough comparison tables to know that each was written by the party that wins it. A table that says “a strip is better for a binary triage decision” is believed precisely because it costs the author something. That credibility then transfers to the claims that follow, which is the entire mechanism by which technical marketing works — not by asserting superiority, but by being the source that does not overstate. In a market where every brochure claims completeness, restraint is the differentiating feature.
Disclosure. Comparisons address method categories and selection logic; platform-specific figures are marked where they require verification.
Frequently asked questions
- Which method is best?
- There is no universal answer. The binding constraint differs by setting: detection limit at a central laboratory, latency in an emergency clinic, batch economics for screening programmes, and portability where there is no bench. Comparisons here are organised around those constraints rather than around a ranking.
- Is a quantitative assay always better than a qualitative one?
- No. It is better when a trend or an audit trail is needed. A qualitative strip is adequate for a binary decision that will be acted on immediately and never recorded — and it is cheaper.