Literature DB >> 17613649

Assessing individual agreement.

Huiman X Barnhart1, Andrzej S Kosinski, Michael J Haber.   

Abstract

Evaluating agreement between measurement methods or between observers is important in method comparison studies and in reliability studies. Often we are interested in whether a new method can replace an existing invasive or expensive method, or whether multiple methods or multiple observers can be used interchangeably. Ideally, interchangeability is established only if individual measurements from different methods are similar to replicated measurements from the same method. This is the concept of individual equivalence. Interchangeability between methods is similar to bioequivalence between drugs in bioequivalence studies. Following the FDA guidelines on individual bioequivalence, we propose to assess individual agreement among multiple methods via individual equivalence using the moment criteria. In the case where there is a reference method, we extend the individual bioequivalence criteria to individual equivalence criteria and propose to use individual equivalence coefficient (IEC) to compare multiple methods to one or multiple references. In the case where there is no reference method available, we propose a new IEC to assess individual agreement between multiple methods. Furthermore, we propose a coefficient of individual agreement (CIA) that links the IEC with two recent agreement indices. A method of moments is used for estimation, where one can utilize output from ANOVA models. The nonparametric and bootstrap approaches are used for inference. Five examples are used for illustration.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17613649     DOI: 10.1080/10543400701329489

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biopharm Stat        ISSN: 1054-3406            Impact factor:   1.051


  11 in total

1.  Metrology Standards for Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers.

Authors:  Daniel C Sullivan; Nancy A Obuchowski; Larry G Kessler; David L Raunig; Constantine Gatsonis; Erich P Huang; Marina Kondratovich; Lisa M McShane; Anthony P Reeves; Daniel P Barboriak; Alexander R Guimaraes; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Quantitation of Cancer Treatment Response by 18F-FDG PET/CT: Multicenter Assessment of Measurement Variability.

Authors:  Joo Hyun O; Heather Jacene; Brandon Luber; Hao Wang; Minh-Huy Huynh; Jeffrey P Leal; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Evaluation of Agreement between Measurement Methods from Data with Matched Repeated Measurements via the Coefficient of Individual Agreement.

Authors:  Michael Haber; Jingjing Gao; Huiman X Barnhart
Journal:  J Data Sci       Date:  2010-07-01

4.  Estimation of coefficients of individual agreement (CIAs) for quantitative and binary data using SAS and R.

Authors:  Yi Pan; Jingjing Gao; Michael Haber; Huiman X Barnhart
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 5.  Quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical methods for computer algorithm comparisons.

Authors:  Nancy A Obuchowski; Anthony P Reeves; Erich P Huang; Xiao-Feng Wang; Andrew J Buckler; Hyun J Grace Kim; Huiman X Barnhart; Edward F Jackson; Maryellen L Giger; Gene Pennello; Alicia Y Toledano; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Tatiyana V Apanasovich; Paul E Kinahan; Kyle J Myers; Dmitry B Goldgof; Daniel P Barboriak; Robert J Gillies; Lawrence H Schwartz; Daniel C Sullivan
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 3.021

6.  Information-based measure of disagreement for more than two observers: a useful tool to compare the degree of observer disagreement.

Authors:  Teresa Henriques; Luis Antunes; João Bernardes; Mara Matias; Diogo Sato; Cristina Costa-Santos
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  RIPOSTE: a framework for improving the design and analysis of laboratory-based research.

Authors:  Nicholas Gd Masca; Elizabeth Ma Hensor; Victoria R Cornelius; Francesca M Buffa; Helen M Marriott; James M Eales; Michael P Messenger; Amy E Anderson; Chris Boot; Catey Bunce; Robert D Goldin; Jessica Harris; Rod F Hinchliffe; Hiba Junaid; Shaun Kingston; Carmen Martin-Ruiz; Christopher P Nelson; Janet Peacock; Paul T Seed; Bethany Shinkins; Karl J Staples; Jamie Toombs; Adam Ka Wright; M Dawn Teare
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 8.140

8.  Comparison Between Non-Invasive Methane Measurement Techniques in Cattle.

Authors:  Jagoba Rey; Raquel Atxaerandio; Roberto Ruiz; Eva Ugarte; Oscar González-Recio; Aser Garcia-Rodriguez; Idoia Goiri
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-15       Impact factor: 2.752

9.  Using multiple agreement methods for continuous repeated measures data: a tutorial for practitioners.

Authors:  Richard A Parker; Charles Scott; Vanda Inácio; Nathaniel T Stevens
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-06-12       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Analytical validation of a prognostic prostate cancer gene expression assay using formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue.

Authors:  Paul Wallace Medlow; Christopher James Steele; Andrena Marie McCavigan; Wesley Reardon; Christopher Michael Brown; Shauna May Lambe; Felipe Augusto Andre Ishiy; Steven Michael Walker; Gemma Elizabeth Logan; Olaide Yaqeen Raji; Viktor Berge; Betina Katz; Elaine Williamson Kay; Katherine Sheehan; Ronald William Watson; Denis Paul Harkin; Richard Darragh Kennedy; Laura Anne Knight
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2018-12-27       Impact factor: 3.063

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.