Literature DB >> 16627197

Statistical combination schemes of repeated diagnostic test data.

Kelly H Zou1, Jui G Bhagwat, John A Carrino.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: When diagnostic tests are repeated and combined, a number of schemes may be adopted. Guidelines for their interpretations are required.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three combination schemes, "and" (A), "or" (O), and "majority" (M), are considered. To evaluate these schemes, dependency by specifying kappa values quantifying repeated test agreement was structured. In a pilot study, the combined accuracies of magnetic resonance imaging using six different pulse sequences of medial collateral ligaments of the elbows of 28 cadavers, with eight having lesions artificially created surgically, were examined. Images were evaluated simultaneously by using a five-point ordinal scale. For each pulse sequence, individuals for whom the diagnosis varied from once to three repetitions were considered.
RESULTS: Scheme M improves diagnostic accuracy when sensitivity and specificity of a single test exceed 0.5, with maximal improvement at 0.79. Under scheme A, sensitivity decreases to 0.38-0.59. Under scheme O, sensitivity increases to 0.53-0.79. Scheme M yields a small improvement, reaching 0.50-0.71. Under scheme A, specificity increases to 0.95-0.98. Under scheme O, specificity decreases to 0.91-0.98. Scheme M also yields a small improvement, reaching 0.94-0.98.
CONCLUSION: Scheme A is recommended for ruling in diagnoses, scheme O is recommended for ruling out diagnoses, and scheme M is neutral. Consequently, different schemes may be used to optimize the target diagnostic accuracy.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16627197      PMCID: PMC1475743          DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2006.01.052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  8 in total

1.  Lateral ulnar collateral ligament of the elbow: optimization of evaluation with two-dimensional MR imaging.

Authors:  J A Carrino; W B Morrison; K H Zou; R T Steffen; W N Snearly; P M Murray
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Testing the equality of two dependent kappa statistics.

Authors:  A Donner; M M Shoukri; N Klar; E Bartfay
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-02-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Noncontrast MR imaging and MR arthrography of the ulnar collateral ligament of the elbow: prospective evaluation of two-dimensional pulse sequences for detection of complete tears.

Authors:  J A Carrino; W B Morrison; K H Zou; R T Steffen; W N Snearly; P M Murray
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2001-07-31       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Comparison of accuracy and interreader agreement in side-by-side versus independent evaluations of MR imaging of the medial collateral ligament of the elbow.

Authors:  Kelly H Zou; John A Carrino
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of a sequence of tests.

Authors:  Mary Lou Thompson
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.899

6.  Combining diagnostic test results to increase accuracy.

Authors:  M S Pepe; M L Thompson
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.899

7.  On linear combinations of biomarkers to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  Aiyi Liu; Enrique F Schisterman; Yan Zhu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

  8 in total
  5 in total

1.  Benefits of Independent Double Reading in Digital Mammography: A Theoretical Evaluation of All Possible Pairing Methodologies.

Authors:  Patrick C Brennan; Aarthi Ganesan; Miguel P Eckstein; Ernest Usang Ekpo; Kriscia Tapia; Claudia Mello-Thoms; Sarah Lewis; Mordechai Z Juni
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2018-07-29       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  ROC analysis in biomarker combination with covariate adjustment.

Authors:  Danping Liu; Xiao-Hua Zhou
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Approximating the risk score for disease diagnosis using MARS.

Authors:  Binbing Yu
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 1.404

4.  Home-based visual field test for glaucoma screening comparison with Humphrey perimeter.

Authors:  Stylianos Tsapakis; Dimitrios Papaconstantinou; Andreas Diagourtas; Stylianos Kandarakis; Konstantinos Droutsas; Konstantinos Andreanos; Dimitrios Brouzas
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-12-12

5.  Accuracy of different diagnostic tests for early, delayed and late prosthetic joint infection.

Authors:  M Fernández-Sampedro; C Fariñas-Alvarez; C Garces-Zarzalejo; M A Alonso-Aguirre; C Salas-Venero; L Martínez-Martínez; M C Fariñas
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 3.090

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.