Literature DB >> 12436459

Optimal designs of two-stage studies for estimation of sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value.

Roseanne McNamee1.   

Abstract

The cost efficiency of estimation of sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value from two-stage sampling designs is considered, assuming a relatively cheap test classifies first-stage subjects into several categories and an expensive gold standard is applied at stage two. Simple variance formulae are derived and used to find optimal designs for a given cost ratio. The utility of two-stage designs is measured by the reduction in variances compared with one-stage simple random designs. Separate second-stage design is also compared with proportional allocation (PA). The maximum percentage reductions in variance from two-stage designs for sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value estimation are P per cent, (1-P) per cent and W, respectively, where P is the population prevalence of disease and W the population percentage of test negatives. The optimum allocation of stage-two resources is not obvious: the optimum proportion of true cases at stage two may even be less than under PA. PA is near optimal for sensitivity estimation in most cases when prevalence is low, but inefficient compared with the optimal scheme for specificity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12436459     DOI: 10.1002/sim.1318

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


  9 in total

1.  Evaluation of a records-review surveillance system used to determine the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Rachel Nonkin Avchen; Lisa D Wiggins; Owen Devine; Kim Van Naarden Braun; Catherine Rice; Nancy C Hobson; Diana Schendel; Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsopp
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2011-02

2.  Setting criterion thresholds for estimating prevalence: what is being validated?

Authors:  Blase Gambino
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2014-09

3.  Estimating the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of two diagnostic tests when one test is conducted on only a subsample of specimens.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki; Yan Li; David W Edelstein; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-12-04       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Study design for non-recurring, time-to-event outcomes in the presence of error-prone diagnostic tests or self-reports.

Authors:  Xiangdong Gu; Raji Balasubramanian
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Repeated significance tests of linear combinations of sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic biomarker.

Authors:  Mixia Wu; Yu Shu; Zhaohai Li; Aiyi Liu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 6.  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

7.  Accuracy of record linkage software in merging dental administrative data sets.

Authors:  Heather Beil; John S Preisser; R Gary Rozier
Journal:  J Public Health Dent       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 1.821

8.  The cost-effectiveness of reclassification sampling for prevalence estimation.

Authors:  Airat Bekmetjev; Dirk VanBruggen; Brian McLellan; Benjamin DeWinkle; Eric Lunderberg; Nathan Tintle
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Identification of adults with symptoms suggestive of obstructive airways disease: validation of a postal respiratory questionnaire.

Authors:  Timothy L Frank; Peter I Frank; Jennifer A Cropper; Michelle L Hazell; Philip C Hannaford; Roseanne R McNamee; Sybil Hirsch; Charles A C Pickering
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2003-04-25       Impact factor: 2.497

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.