Literature DB >> 11870821

Analytic methods for comparing two dichotomous screening or diagnostic tests applied to two populations of differing disease prevalence when individuals negative on both tests are unverified.

Geoffrey Berry1, Catherine L Smith, Petra Macaskill, Les Irwig.   

Abstract

Two dichotomous screening tests may be compared by applying both tests to all members of a sampled population. For individuals with a positive result on either test the disease status may be verified by a reference standard, but for individuals negative on both tests the disease status may be unverified because the probability of disease is so low that further investigation is costly, unacceptable and perhaps unethical. If the tests have been applied to samples from two populations which have different disease prevalences then unbiased estimates of the true positive and false positive rates of each test, the prevalences in the two populations, and two parameters representing dependence between the two tests can be estimated using maximum likelihood methods. The methods are based on the assumption that the sensitivities and specificities of the two tests, and the dependencies between the tests, are independent of prevalence. A test of goodness of fit provides a test of this. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11870821     DOI: 10.1002/sim.1066

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


  6 in total

1.  Prevalence estimation when disease status is verified only among test positives: Applications in HIV screening programs.

Authors:  Emma G Thomas; Sarah B Peskoe; Donna Spiegelman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Estimation of diagnostic test accuracy without full verification: a review of latent class methods.

Authors:  John Collins; Minh Huynh
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  A prospective feasibility study to evaluate neoadjuvant-synchronous S-1 with radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: A multicentre phase II trial.

Authors:  Masafumi Inomata; Tomonori Akagi; Kentaro Nakajima; Tsuyoshi Etoh; Koichiro Tahara; Toshifumi Matsumoto; Tadashi Ogawa; Kyuzo Fujii; Akio Shiromizu; Seigo Kitano
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02-04

4.  A two-stage Bayesian method for estimating accuracy and disease prevalence for two dependent dichotomous screening tests when the status of individuals who are negative on both tests is unverified.

Authors:  Jin Liu; Feng Chen; Hao Yu; Ping Zeng; Liya Liu
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Comparative accuracy of Pap smear and HPV screening in Ubon Ratchathani in Thailand.

Authors:  Suleeporn Sangrajrang; Piyawat Laowahutanont; Metee Wongsena; Richard Muwonge; Anant Karalak; Weerawut Imsamran; Virginia Senkomago; Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan
Journal:  Papillomavirus Res       Date:  2016-12-26

6.  Exploring the Patterns of Use and Acceptability of Mobile Phones Among People Living With HIV to Improve Care and Treatment: Cross-Sectional Study in Three Francophone West African Countries.

Authors:  Phillipe Lepère; Yélamikan Touré; Alexandra M Bitty-Anderson; Simon P Boni; Gildas Anago; Boris Tchounga; Pendadiago Touré; Albert Minga; Eugène Messou; Guillaume Kanga; Serge Koule; Armel Poda; Alexandra Calmy; Didier K Ekouevi; Patrick A Coffie
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 4.773

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.