Literature DB >> 20337658

Linear regression analysis for comparing two measurers or methods of measurement: but which regression?

John Ludbrook1.   

Abstract

1. There are two reasons for wanting to compare measurers or methods of measurement. One is to calibrate one method or measurer against another; the other is to detect bias. Fixed bias is present when one method gives higher (or lower) values across the whole range of measurement. Proportional bias is present when one method gives values that diverge progressively from those of the other. 2. Linear regression analysis is a popular method for comparing methods of measurement, but the familiar ordinary least squares (OLS) method is rarely acceptable. The OLS method requires that the x values are fixed by the design of the study, whereas it is usual that both y and x values are free to vary and are subject to error. In this case, special regression techniques must be used. 3. Clinical chemists favour techniques such as major axis regression ('Deming's method'), the Passing-Bablok method or the bivariate least median squares method. Other disciplines, such as allometry, astronomy, biology, econometrics, fisheries research, genetics, geology, physics and sports science, have their own preferences. 4. Many Monte Carlo simulations have been performed to try to decide which technique is best, but the results are almost uninterpretable. 5. I suggest that pharmacologists and physiologists should use ordinary least products regression analysis (geometric mean regression, reduced major axis regression): it is versatile, can be used for calibration or to detect bias and can be executed by hand-held calculator or by using the loss function in popular, general-purpose, statistical software.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20337658     DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1681.2010.05376.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol        ISSN: 0305-1870            Impact factor:   2.557


  38 in total

1.  Categorized or continuous? Strength of an association and linear regression.

Authors:  Gordon B Drummond; Sarah L Vowler
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Categorized or continuous? Strength of an association - and linear regression.

Authors:  Gordon B Drummond; Sarah L Vowler
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 8.739

3.  The discordant method: a novel approach for differential correlation.

Authors:  Charlotte Siska; Russell Bowler; Katerina Kechris
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2015-10-31       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  Reproducibility of functional aortic analysis using magnetic resonance imaging: the MESA.

Authors:  Chikara Noda; Bharath Ambale Venkatesh; Yoshiaki Ohyama; Chia-Ying Liu; Elzbieta Chamera; Alban Redheuil; Gisela Teixido-Tura; Atul R Chugh; Colin O Wu; Gregory W Hundley; David A Bluemke; Joao A C Lima
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  An index to objectively score supraglottic abnormalities in refractory asthma: learning, validation, and significance.

Authors:  James T Good; Donald R Rollins; Douglas Curran-Everett; Steven E Lommatzsch; Brendan J Carolan; Peter C Stubenrauch; Richard J Martin
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  A comparison of cup-to-disc ratio estimates by fundus biomicroscopy and stereoscopic optic disc photography in the Tema Eye Survey.

Authors:  J C Mwanza; D S Grover; D L Budenz; L W Herndon; W Nolan; J Whiteside-de Vos; G Hay-Smith; J R Bandi; K A Bhansali; L A Forbes; W J Feuer; K Barton
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 3.775

7.  Choice of statistical method influences apparent association between structure and function in glaucoma.

Authors:  Iván Marín-Franch; Rizwan Malik; David P Crabb; William H Swanson
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Accounting for Random Regressors: A Unified Approach to Multi-modality Imaging.

Authors:  Xue Yang; Carolyn B Lauzon; Ciprian Crainiceanu; Brian Caffo; Susan M Resnick; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  Multimodal Brain Image Anal (2011)       Date:  2011

9.  Biological parametric mapping accounting for random regressors with regression calibration and model II regression.

Authors:  Xue Yang; Carolyn B Lauzon; Ciprian Crainiceanu; Brian Caffo; Susan M Resnick; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Relative Validity of a Diet History Questionnaire Against a Four-Day Weighed Food Record among Older Men in Australia: The Concord Health and Ageing in Men Project (CHAMP).

Authors:  W V R Rosilene; R Cumming; T Travison; F Blyth; V Naganathan; M Allman-Farinelli; V Hirani
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.