Literature DB >> 19499551

Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence: alternative parameterizations and model selection.

Haitao Chu1, Lei Nie, Stephen R Cole, Charles Poole.   

Abstract

In a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies, the sensitivities and specificities of a diagnostic test may depend on the disease prevalence since the severity and definition of disease may differ from study to study due to the design and the population considered. In this paper, we extend the bivariate nonlinear random effects model on sensitivities and specificities to jointly model the disease prevalence, sensitivities and specificities using trivariate nonlinear random-effects models. Furthermore, as an alternative parameterization, we also propose jointly modeling the test prevalence and the predictive values, which reflect the clinical utility of a diagnostic test. These models allow investigators to study the complex relationship among the disease prevalence, sensitivities and specificities; or among test prevalence and the predictive values, which can reveal hidden information about test performance. We illustrate the proposed two approaches by reanalyzing the data from a meta-analysis of radiological evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer and a simulation study. The latter illustrates the importance of carefully choosing an appropriate normality assumption for the disease prevalence, sensitivities and specificities, or the test prevalence and the predictive values. In practice, it is recommended to use model selection techniques to identify a best-fitting model for making statistical inference. In summary, the proposed trivariate random effects models are novel and can be very useful in practice for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19499551     DOI: 10.1002/sim.3627

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


  25 in total

1.  Meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes: a marginal beta-binomial model approach.

Authors:  Yong Chen; Chuan Hong; Yang Ning; Xiao Su
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Assessing the dependence of sensitivity and specificity on prevalence in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jialiang Li; Jason P Fine
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  A Bayesian hierarchical model for network meta-analysis of multiple diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Xiaoye Ma; Qinshu Lian; Haitao Chu; Joseph G Ibrahim; Yong Chen
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 5.899

Review 4.  Statistical methods for multivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic tests: An overview and tutorial.

Authors:  Xiaoye Ma; Lei Nie; Stephen R Cole; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  A Bayesian Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic Model for Network Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Tests.

Authors:  Qinshu Lian; James S Hodges; Haitao Chu
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 5.033

6.  A simple and robust method for multivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.

Authors:  Yong Chen; Yulun Liu; Haitao Chu; Mei-Ling Ting Lee; Christopher H Schmid
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  A hybrid Bayesian hierarchical model combining cohort and case-control studies for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests: Accounting for partial verification bias.

Authors:  Xiaoye Ma; Yong Chen; Stephen R Cole; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2014-05-26       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  A hybrid model for combining case-control and cohort studies in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Yong Chen; Yulun Liu; Jing Ning; Janice Cormier; Haitao Chu
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 1.864

9.  Bivariate random effects models for meta-analysis of comparative studies with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Lei Nie; Yong Chen; Yi Huang; Wei Sun
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 3.021

10.  Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of diagnostic studies using generalized linear mixed models.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Hongfei Guo; Yijie Zhou
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.