Literature DB >> 18556677

Sample size for positive and negative predictive value in diagnostic research using case-control designs.

David M Steinberg1, Jason Fine, Rick Chappell.   

Abstract

Important properties of diagnostic methods are their sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). These methods are typically assessed via case-control samples, which include one cohort of cases known to have the disease and a second control cohort of disease-free subjects. Such studies give direct estimates of sensitivity and specificity but only indirect estimates of PPV and NPV, which also depend on the disease prevalence in the tested population. The motivating example arises in assay testing, where usage is contemplated in populations with known prevalences. Further instances include biomarker development, where subjects are selected from a population with known prevalence and assessment of PPV and NPV is crucial, and the assessment of diagnostic imaging procedures for rare diseases, where case-control studies may be the only feasible designs. We develop formulas for optimal allocation of the sample between the case and control cohorts and for computing sample size when the goal of the study is to prove that the test procedure exceeds pre-stated bounds for PPV and/or NPV. Surprisingly, the optimal sampling schemes for many purposes are highly unbalanced, even when information is desired on both PPV and NPV.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18556677      PMCID: PMC3668447          DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxn018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biostatistics        ISSN: 1465-4644            Impact factor:   5.899


  9 in total

Review 1.  Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer.

Authors:  M S Pepe; R Etzioni; Z Feng; J D Potter; M L Thompson; M Thornquist; M Winget; Y Yasui
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-07-18       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Comparison of predictive values of two diagnostic tests from the same sample of subjects using weighted least squares.

Authors:  Wenquan Wang; Charles S Davis; Seng-Jaw Soong
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-07-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Comparing the predictive values of diagnostic tests: sample size and analysis for paired study designs.

Authors:  Chaya S Moskowitz; Margaret S Pepe
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  Prevalence-dependent diagnostic accuracy measures.

Authors:  Jialiang Li; Jason P Fine; Nasia Safdar
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-07-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 5.  Evaluating markers for the early detection of cancer: overview of study designs and methods.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker; Barnett S Kramer; Martin McIntosh; Blossom H Patterson; Yu Shyr; Steven Skates
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Likelihood ratios with confidence: sample size estimation for diagnostic test studies.

Authors:  D L Simel; G P Samsa; D B Matchar
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Nested case-control and case-cohort methods of sampling from a cohort: a critical comparison.

Authors:  B Langholz; D C Thomas
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  Ruling out or ruling in disease with the most sensitive or specific diagnostic test: short cut or wrong turn?

Authors:  E J Boyko
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1994 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 9.  Likelihood ratios: a real improvement for clinical decision making?

Authors:  B Dujardin; J Van den Ende; A Van Gompel; J P Unger; P Van der Stuyft
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 8.082

  9 in total
  16 in total

1.  Accuracy of administrative billing codes to detect urinary tract infection hospitalizations.

Authors:  Joel S Tieder; Matthew Hall; Katherine A Auger; Paul D Hain; Karen E Jerardi; Angela L Myers; Suraiya S Rahman; Derek J Williams; Samir S Shah
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 7.124

2.  Borrowing Information across Populations in Estimating Positive and Negative Predictive Values.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Youyi Fong; John Wei; Ziding Feng
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 1.864

3.  Better Estimation of Spontaneous Preterm Birth Prediction Performance through Improved Gestational Age Dating.

Authors:  Julja Burchard; George R Saade; Kim A Boggess; Glenn R Markenson; Jay D Iams; Dean V Coonrod; Leonardo M Pereira; Matthew K Hoffman; Ashoka D Polpitiya; Ryan Treacy; Angela C Fox; Todd L Randolph; Tracey C Fleischer; Max T Dufford; Thomas J Garite; Gregory C Critchfield; J Jay Boniface; Paul E Kearney
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  Comparison of the cohort selection performance of Australian Medicines Terminology to Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical mappings.

Authors:  Guan N Guo; Jitendra Jonnagaddala; Sanjay Farshid; Vojtech Huser; Christian Reich; Siaw-Teng Liaw
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Clinical validation of an epigenetic assay to predict negative histopathological results in repeat prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Alan W Partin; Leander Van Neste; Eric A Klein; Leonard S Marks; Jason R Gee; Dean A Troyer; Kimberly Rieger-Christ; J Stephen Jones; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Leslie A Mangold; Bruce J Trock; Raymond S Lance; Joseph W Bigley; Wim Van Criekinge; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-04-18       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Pediatric severe sepsis in U.S. children's hospitals.

Authors:  Fran Balamuth; Scott L Weiss; Mark I Neuman; Halden Scott; Patrick W Brady; Raina Paul; Reid W D Farris; Richard McClead; Katie Hayes; David Gaieski; Matt Hall; Samir S Shah; Elizabeth R Alpern
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.624

7.  A validation study of a new classification algorithm to identify rheumatoid arthritis using administrative health databases: case-control and cohort diagnostic accuracy studies. Results from the RECord linkage On Rheumatic Diseases study of the Italian Society for Rheumatology.

Authors:  Greta Carrara; Carlo A Scirè; Antonella Zambon; Marco A Cimmino; Carlo Cerra; Marta Caprioli; Giovanni Cagnotto; Federica Nicotra; Andrea Arfè; Simona Migliazza; Giovanni Corrao; Giovanni Minisola; Carlomaurizio Montecucco
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Dynamic classification using case-specific training cohorts outperforms static gene expression signatures in breast cancer.

Authors:  Balázs Győrffy; Thomas Karn; Zsófia Sztupinszki; Boglárka Weltz; Volkmar Müller; Lajos Pusztai
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-10-11       Impact factor: 7.396

9.  Letter to the Editor: Re: F Itza, D Zarza, J Salinas, F Teba, C Ximenez. Turn-amplitude analysis as a diagnostic test for myofascial syndrome in patients with chronic pelvic pain. Pain Res Manag 2015;20(2):96-100.

Authors:  Dinesh Kumbhare; Lawrence Robinson
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.037

10.  Plasma 24-metabolite Panel Predicts Preclinical Transition to Clinical Stages of Alzheimer's Disease.

Authors:  Massimo S Fiandaca; Xiaogang Zhong; Amrita K Cheema; Michael H Orquiza; Swathi Chidambaram; Ming T Tan; Carole Roan Gresenz; Kevin T FitzGerald; Mike A Nalls; Andrew B Singleton; Mark Mapstone; Howard J Federoff
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.