Abstract In ISO Guide it is strictly recommended to correct results for the recognised significant bias, but in special cases some analysts find out practical to omit the correction and to enlarge the expanded uncertainty for the uncorrected bias instead. In this paper, four alternatively used methods computing these modified expanded uncertainties are compared according to the levels of confidence, widths and layouts of the obtained uncertainty intervals. The method, which seems to be the best, because it provides the same uncertainty intervals as in the case of the bias correction, has not been applied very much, maybe since these modified uncertainty intervals are not symmetric about the results. The three remaining investigated methods maintain their intervals symmetric, but only two of them provide intervals of the kind, that their levels of confidence reach at least the required value (95%) or a larger one. The third method defines intervals with low levels of confidence (even for small biases). It is proposed a new method, which gives symmetric intervals just with the required level of confidence. These intervals are narrower than those symmetric intervals with the sufficient level of confidence obtained by the two mentioned methods. A mathematical background of the problem and an illustrative example of calculations applying all compared methods are attached.