Literature DB >> 17968858

A non-inferiority test for diagnostic accuracy based on the paired partial areas under ROC curves.

Chi-Rong Li1, Chen-Tuo Liao, Jen-Pei Liu.   

Abstract

Non-inferiority is a reasonable approach to assessing the diagnostic accuracy of a new diagnostic test if it provides an easier administration or reduces the cost. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve is one of the common measures for the overall diagnostic accuracy. However, it may not differentiate the various shapes of the ROC curves with different diagnostic significances. The partial area under the ROC curve (PAUROC) may present an alternative that can provide additional and complimentary information for some diagnostic tests which require false-positive rate that does not exceed a certain level. Non-parametric and maximum likelihood methods can be used for the non-inferiority tests based on the difference in paired PAUROCs. However, their performance has not been investigated in finite samples. We propose to use the concept of generalized p-value to construct a non-inferiority test for diagnostic accuracy based on the difference in paired PAUROCs. Simulation results show that the proposed non-inferiority test not only adequately controls the size at the nominal level but also is uniformly more powerful than the non-parametric methods. The proposed method is illustrated with a numerical example using published data.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 17968858     DOI: 10.1002/sim.3121

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


  8 in total

1.  Parametric and non-parametric confidence intervals of the probability of identifying early disease stage given sensitivity to full disease and specificity with three ordinal diagnostic groups.

Authors:  Tuochuan Dong; Lili Tian; Alan Hutson; Chengjie Xiong
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Evaluating imaging and computer-aided detection and diagnosis devices at the FDA.

Authors:  Brandon D Gallas; Heang-Ping Chan; Carl J D'Orsi; Lori E Dodd; Maryellen L Giger; David Gur; Elizabeth A Krupinski; Charles E Metz; Kyle J Myers; Nancy A Obuchowski; Berkman Sahiner; Alicia Y Toledano; Margarita L Zuley
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2012-02-03       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Exact confidence interval estimation for the difference in diagnostic accuracy with three ordinal diagnostic groups.

Authors:  Lili Tian; Chengjie Xiong; Chin-Ying Lai; Albert Vexler
Journal:  J Stat Plan Inference       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 1.111

4.  Confidence interval estimation of the difference between two sensitivities to the early disease stage.

Authors:  Tuochuan Dong; Le Kang; Alan Hutson; Chengjie Xiong; Lili Tian
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 2.207

5.  Diagnostic thresholds with three ordinal groups.

Authors:  Kristopher Attwood; Lili Tian; Chengjie Xiong
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.051

6.  Bias in trials comparing paired continuous tests can cause researchers to choose the wrong screening modality.

Authors:  Deborah H Glueck; Molly M Lamb; Colin I O'Donnell; Brandy M Ringham; John T Brinton; Keith E Muller; John M Lewin; Todd A Alonzo; Etta D Pisano
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Investigation of publication bias in meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy: a meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  W Annefloor van Enst; Eleanor Ochodo; Rob J P M Scholten; Lotty Hooft; Mariska M Leeflang
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  The generalized inference on the ratio of mean differences for fraction retention noninferiority hypothesis.

Authors:  Hsin-Neng Hsieh; Hung-Yi Lu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.