Literature DB >> 18427707

Optimal decision criterion for detecting change in bone mineral density during serial monitoring: a Bayesian approach.

M Sadatsafavi1, A Moayyeri, L Wang, W D Leslie.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Interpretation of change in serial bone densitometry using least significant change (LSC) may not lead to optimal decision making. Using the principles of Bayesian statistics and decision sciences, we developed the Optimal Decision Criterion (ODC) which resulted in 11-12.5% higher rate of correct classification compared with the LSC method.
INTRODUCTION: The interpretation of change in serial bone densitometry emphasizes using least significant change (LSC) to distinguish between true changes and measurement error.
METHODS: Using the principles of Bayesian statistics and decision sciences, we developed the optimal decision criterion (ODC) based on maximizing a 'utility' function that rewards the correct and penalizes the incorrect classification of change. The relationship between LSC and ODC is demonstrated using a clinical sample from the Manitoba Bone Density Program.
RESULTS: Under certain conditions, it can be shown that using LSC at the 95% confidence level implicitly equates the benefit of 39 true positive diagnoses with the harm of one false positive classification of BMD change. ODC resulted in an 11% higher rate of correct classification for lumbar spine BMD change and a 12.5% better performance for classifying total hip BMD change compared with LSC with this method.
CONCLUSIONS: ODC has the same clinical interpretation as LSC but with two major advantages: it can incorporate prior knowledge of the likely values of the true change and it can be fine-tuned based on the relative value placed on the correct and incorrect classifications. Bayesian statistics and decision sciences could potentially increase the yield of a BMD monitoring program.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18427707     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-008-0615-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  21 in total

Review 1.  Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests?

Authors:  J A Sterne; G Davey Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-01-27

2.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1974-09-27       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The statistical basis of public policy: a paradigm shift is overdue.

Authors:  R J Lilford; D Braunholtz
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-07

4.  The threshold approach to clinical decision making.

Authors:  S G Pauker; J P Kassirer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1980-05-15       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Monitoring osteoporosis therapy with bone densitometry: misleading changes and regression to the mean. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group.

Authors:  S R Cummings; L Palermo; W Browner; R Marcus; R Wallace; J Pearson; T Blackwell; S Eckert; D Black
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-03-08       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Prevention of nonvertebral fractures by alendronate. A meta-analysis. Alendronate Osteoporosis Treatment Study Groups.

Authors:  D B Karpf; D R Shapiro; E Seeman; K E Ensrud; C C Johnston; S Adami; S T Harris; A C Santora; L J Hirsch; L Oppenheimer; D Thompson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-04-09       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  The importance of spectrum bias on bone density monitoring in clinical practice.

Authors:  William D Leslie
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2006-03-13       Impact factor: 4.398

8.  Progressive loss of bone in the femoral neck in elderly people: longitudinal findings from the Dubbo osteoporosis epidemiology study.

Authors:  G Jones; T Nguyen; P Sambrook; P J Kelly; J A Eisman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-09-17

Review 9.  Precision assessment and radiation safety for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: position paper of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry.

Authors:  Sanford Baim; Charles R Wilson; E Michael Lewiecki; Marjorie M Luckey; Robert W Downs; Brian C Lentle
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.963

Review 10.  What is the role of serial bone mineral density measurements in patient management?

Authors:  Leon Lenchik; Gary M Kiebzak; Barbara A Blunt
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry bone densitometry in pediatrics: a practical review and update.

Authors:  Hedieh Khalatbari; Larry A Binkovitz; Marguerite T Parisi
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2020-08-28
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.