Literature DB >> 10544302

Using a combination of reference tests to assess the accuracy of a new diagnostic test.

T A Alonzo1, M S Pepe.   

Abstract

Often the accuracy of a new diagnostic test must be assessed when a perfect gold standard does not exist. Use of an imperfect reference test biases accuracy estimates of the new test. This paper reviews existing approaches to this problem including discrepant resolution and latent class analysis. Deficiencies with these approaches are identified. A new approach is proposed that combines the results of several imperfect reference tests to define a better reference standard. We call this the composite reference standard (CRS). Using the CRS, accuracy can be assessed using multi-stage sampling designs. Maximum likelihood estimates of accuracy and expressions for the variance of sensitivity and specificity are provided. Data from clinical literature on the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis are used to illustrate and compare the different approaches. Advantages of the CRS relative to other approaches include that the CRS is explicitly defined, does not depend on the results of the new test under investigation, and is easy to interpret. Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10544302     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19991130)18:22<2987::aid-sim205>3.0.co;2-b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  74 in total

1.  Discrepant analysis is still at large.

Authors:  M Sternberg
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Discrepant analysis: how can we test a test?

Authors:  A J McAdam
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE): an algorithm for the validation of image segmentation.

Authors:  Simon K Warfield; Kelly H Zou; William M Wells
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 4.  Methods and recommendations for evaluating and reporting a new diagnostic test.

Authors:  A S Hess; M Shardell; J K Johnson; K A Thom; P Strassle; G Netzer; A D Harris
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 5.  The validation of screening tests: meet the new screen same as the old screen?

Authors:  Blase Gambino
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2012-12

6.  Quantitative PCR assay using sputum samples for rapid diagnosis of pneumococcal pneumonia in adult emergency department patients.

Authors:  Samuel Yang; Shin Lin; Ambreen Khalil; Charlotte Gaydos; Eric Nuemberger; George Juan; Justin Hardick; John G Bartlett; Paul G Auwaerter; Richard E Rothman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 7.  Testing specimens for Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  S Skidmore; P Horner; H Mallinson
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.519

8.  Comparative study of Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus serological assays using clinically and serologically defined reference standards and latent class analysis.

Authors:  Maria Claudia Nascimento; Vanda Akico de Souza; Laura Masami Sumita; Wilton Freire; Fernando Munoz; Joseph Kim; Claudio S Pannuti; Philippe Mayaud
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-12-20       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by enzyme immunoassay, culture, and three nucleic acid amplification tests.

Authors:  E Van Dyck; M Ieven; S Pattyn; L Van Damme; M Laga
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 10.  New approaches to enhance the accuracy of the diagnosis of reflux disease.

Authors:  P Moayyedi; J Duffy; B Delaney
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 23.059

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.