The decision to obtain a reference standard starts with the question it must answer. A material used to assign a numerical scale needs different supporting information from a material used to check whether a familiar assay response has changed.
Describe the measurement decision
NIST distinguishes reference-material categories with different kinds of assigned values and documentation. Its overview separates certified properties with uncertainties from non-certified values and materials intended primarily for interlaboratory comparison. A reference label therefore needs its supporting context.NIST — Reference materials (opens in a new tab)
Write one sentence describing the intended use: “We need a material to assign the concentration scale for this measurement” or “We need a consistent comparator to monitor changes between runs.” These sentences expose different evidence requirements.
Avoid beginning with a catalogue search for the most authoritative-sounding name. An impressive certificate for the wrong property does not answer the measurement question.
If the study only compares experimental conditions qualitatively, it may still need controls, but that does not automatically mean every reagent must be a certified reference material.
Match the candidate to its proposed job
| Proposed role | Question before selection |
|---|---|
| Assign a numerical scale | Is the required property assigned on a suitable basis with relevant uncertainty? |
| Check measurement performance | Does the material provide a meaningful comparison independent of the calibration being checked? |
| Compare experimental responses | Is its identity and behaviour sufficiently characterised for the stated comparison? |
Consider a hypothetical laboratory measuring peptide amount. A candidate documented only for identity does not automatically establish a quantitative concentration scale. Identity evidence and an assigned amount answer different questions.
In another study, a well-characterised comparator may be useful for observing changes in assay response without supporting an absolute amount measurement. The report should describe that limited role honestly.
Ask whether the sample form and relevant matrix match the intended use closely enough. Any mismatch should be assessed rather than concealed by describing both items simply as “peptide standards”.
Read the property statement before purchasing
Request the current documentation for the exact candidate. Locate the property of interest, its units, assigned value where available, uncertainty information and any restrictions on intended use.
Check that the useful property belongs to the supplied material and remains applicable under its documented conditions. A general description of a reference-material programme is not a substitute for the candidate’s own information.
Where the required reference is unavailable, document the alternative approach and its limits. A secondary or internally characterised material should not be described as certified merely because it is the best available option.
Make the decision reviewable
Record the measurement role, candidates considered, selected material and unresolved limitations. This makes a decision to use a particular standard, or not to use one, understandable to a later reader.
Revisit the choice if the study changes from a relative comparison to an absolute quantitative claim. A material sufficient for the earlier purpose may no longer support the new conclusion.
The goal is evidence appropriate to the measurement. Neither a reference-material name nor a high purity figure removes the need to connect the documented properties to the actual analytical task.
Sources and further detail
- NIST — Reference materials (opens in a new tab)
Official overview checked for differences in assigned values, documentation and intended uses. The decision examples are original and do not certify any commercial peptide.
Sources checked 20 September 2026. Request examples are original illustrations, not actual orders, supplier commitments or Novum product specifications. This article has not undergone independent scientific peer review.