Literature DB >> 15737102

Assessing accuracy of mammography in the presence of verification bias and intrareader correlation.

Yingye Zheng1, William E Barlow, Gary Cutter.   

Abstract

The performance of a medical diagnostic test is often evaluated by comparing the outcome of the test to the patient's true disease state. Receiver operating characteristic analysis may then be used to summarize test accuracy. However, such analysis may encounter several complications in actual practice. One complication is verification bias, i.e., gold standard assessment of disease status may only be partially available and the probability of ascertainment of disease may depend on both the test result and characteristics of the subject. A second issue is that tests interpreted by the same rater may not be independent. Using estimating equations, we generalize previous methods that address these problems. We contrast the performance of alternative estimators of accuracy using robust sandwich variance estimators to permit valid asymptotic inference. We suggest that in the context of an observational cohort study where rich covariate information is available, a weighted estimating equations approach may be preferable for its robustness against model misspecification. We apply the methodology to mammography as performed by community radiologists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15737102     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2005.031139.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  6 in total

1.  Time trends in radiologists' interpretive performance at screening mammography from the community-based Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, 1996-2004.

Authors:  Laura E Ichikawa; William E Barlow; Melissa L Anderson; Stephen H Taplin; Berta M Geller; R James Brenner
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Semiparametric estimation of the covariate-specific ROC curve in presence of ignorable verification bias.

Authors:  Danping Liu; Xiao-Hua Zhou
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Subject-centered free-response ROC (FROC) analysis.

Authors:  Andriy I Bandos; Howard E Rockette; David Gur
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Contrasting two frameworks for ROC analysis of ordinal ratings.

Authors:  Daryl E Morris; Margaret Sullivan Pepe; William E Barlow
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 5.  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

6.  Model-based clustering for assessing the prognostic value of imaging biomarkers and mixed type tests.

Authors:  Zheyu Wang; Krisztian Sebestyen; Sarah E Monsell
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 1.681

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.