1. The journey from the old to the new AMH assay: how to avoid getting lost in the values 
S.M. Nelson, A. La Marca 
Reproductive BioMedicine Online 
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages (October 2011)
DOI: /j.rbmo
Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
Passing and Bablok regression analysis between anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentrations (ng/ml) obtained with Immunotech AMH and AMH Gen II ELISA assays for 120 serum samples. Linear regression analysis results were r=0.99; P<0.0001; y=1.0x. Reproduced with permission from Kumar et al. (2010).
Reproductive BioMedicine Online  , DOI: ( /j.rbmo )
Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Multicentric evaluation of Diagnostic Systems Lab (DSL) anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) assay and Beckman Coulter AMH Generation II (GenII) assay, for 271 samples across the assay range. Top panel=Passing and Bablok regression (intercept 0.62, 95% CI −1.51–0.28, SE 0.46; slope 1.39, 95% CI 1.35–1.44, SE 0.020). Bottom panel=Bland Altman plot (solid line=mean difference; dotted lines=95% CI). Reproduced with permission from Wallace et al. (2011). CI=Confidence interval; SE=standard error.
Reproductive BioMedicine Online  , DOI: ( /j.rbmo )
Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) nomogram for values obtained by the Diagnostic Systems Lab assay, based on a quadratic model of log(AMH) on age, showing predicted AMH value versus age and reference centiles of the distribution. Reproduced with permission from Nelson et al. (2011b).
Reproductive BioMedicine Online  , DOI: ( /j.rbmo )
Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions