The designation "screening method" has less to do with analytical chemistry, and more to do with the marketplace for analytical services. One can only discuss "screening analytical methods" if there is more than one method to analyze for the same target compounds. Analytical methods are compared by assessing a number of factors including analyte list, precision, bias, susceptibility to interferences, detection and quantification capability, quantification range, costs (a function of the required equipment and reagents, labor requirements, throughput, etc.), and so on. When more than one method exists to analyze for a particular target compound or element, one method will tend to excel in one aspect of method performance, but may be worse in other aspects. Naturally, a very important factor is cost. If method options all cost the same, there would be no incentive to use methods that tend to perform more poorly, and they would disappear from the marketplace. However, the cost advantages of some methods counter-balance their poorer analytical performance, especially for applications where better performance is not necessary, or where the interferences that cause poorer performance are not expected to be present. The marketplace retains these methods because they are often faster, "cheaper," and/or easier to use, but will often label them as "screening methods" to distinguish them from higher cost, but better performing methods.

To an analytical chemist, all methods (included regulator-approved methods) have limitations in precision, bias, detection limits, specificity, and interferences. There is no sharp line between screening methods and more rigorous methods, only a continuum of individual performance characteristics and practicality. If allowed to use professional judgment, an analytical chemist would choose the best method for a particular application after balancing the individual performance characteristics of the method (especially the potential for interferences in environmental applications) and costs against the need for information reliable enough to support intended decision-making. Whether or not the marketplace considered that method to be "screening" would not enter into the chemist’s decision to use that method. The chemist would simply decide whether the performance and efficiency of the method was most appropriate for the intended data use, factoring in the budgetary, time, and other logistical constraints of the project.