Literature DB >> 20386104

Estimating population distributions when some data are below a limit of detection by using a reverse Kaplan-Meier estimator.

Brenda W Gillespie1, Qixuan Chen, Heidi Reichert, Alfred Franzblau, Elizabeth Hedgeman, James Lepkowski, Peter Adriaens, Avery Demond, William Luksemburg, David H Garabrant.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Data with some values below a limit of detection (LOD) can be analyzed using methods of survival analysis for left-censored data. The reverse Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimator provides an effective method for estimating the distribution function and thus population percentiles for such data. Although developed in the 1970s and strongly advocated since then, it remains rarely used, partly due to limited software availability.
METHODS: In this paper, the reverse KM estimator is described and is illustrated using serum dioxin data from the University of Michigan Dioxin Exposure Study (UMDES) and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Percentile estimates for left-censored data using the reverse KM estimator are compared with replacing values below the LOD with the LOD/2 or LOD/ radical2.
RESULTS: When some LODs are in the upper range of the complete values, and/or the percent censored is high, the different methods can yield quite different percentile estimates. The reverse KM estimator, which is the nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator, is the preferred method. Software options are discussed: The reverse KM can be calculated using software for the KM estimator. The JMP and SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) and Minitab (Minitab, Inc, State College, PA), software packages calculate the reverse KM directly using their Turnbull estimator routines.
CONCLUSION: The reverse KM estimator is recommended for estimation of the distribution function and population percentiles in preference to commonly used methods such as substituting LOD/2 or LOD/ radical2 for values below the LOD, assuming a known parametric distribution, or using imputation to replace the left-censored values.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20386104     DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181ce9f08

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiology        ISSN: 1044-3983            Impact factor:   4.822


  26 in total

1.  Lasso regularization for left-censored Gaussian outcome and high-dimensional predictors.

Authors:  Perrine Soret; Marta Avalos; Linda Wittkop; Daniel Commenges; Rodolphe Thiébaut
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 4.615

2.  Opening the black box of biomarker measurement error.

Authors:  Enrique F Schisterman; Roderick J Little
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  A Comparison of the β-Substitution Method and a Bayesian Method for Analyzing Left-Censored Data.

Authors:  Tran Huynh; Harrison Quick; Gurumurthy Ramachandran; Sudipto Banerjee; Mark Stenzel; Dale P Sandler; Lawrence S Engel; Richard K Kwok; Aaron Blair; Patricia A Stewart
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2015-07-24

4.  Accommodating measurements below a limit of detection: a novel application of Cox regression.

Authors:  Gregg E Dinse; Todd A Jusko; Lindsey A Ho; Kaushik Annam; Barry I Graubard; Irva Hertz-Picciotto; Frederick W Miller; Brenda W Gillespie; Clarice R Weinberg
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Exposure to Volatile Organic Compounds and Use of Feminine Hygiene Products Among Reproductive-Aged Women in the United States.

Authors:  Ning Ding; Stuart Batterman; Sung Kyun Park
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Raltegravir versus efavirenz in antiretroviral-naive pregnant women living with HIV (NICHD P1081): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 4 trial.

Authors:  Esaú C João; R Leavitt Morrison; David E Shapiro; Nahida Chakhtoura; Maria Isabel S Gouvèa; Maria de Lourdes B Teixeira; Trevon L Fuller; Blandina T Mmbaga; James S Ngocho; Boniface N Njau; Avy Violari; Ruth Mathiba; Zaakirah Essack; Jose Henrique S Pilotto; Luis Felipe Moreira; Maria Jose Rolon; Pedro Cahn; Sinart Prommas; Timothy R Cressey; Kulkanya Chokephaibulkit; Peerawong Werarak; Lauren Laimon; Roslyn Hennessy; Lisa M Frenkel; Patricia Anthony; Brookie M Best; George K Siberry; Mark Mirochnick
Journal:  Lancet HIV       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 12.767

7.  A randomized controlled trial of pretransplant antiviral therapy to prevent recurrence of hepatitis C after liver transplantation.

Authors:  Gregory T Everson; Norah A Terrault; Anna S Lok; Del R Rodrigo; Robert S Brown; Sammy Saab; Mitchell L Shiffman; Abdullah M S Al-Osaimi; Laura M Kulik; Brenda W Gillespie; James E Everhart
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 17.425

8.  Concentrations of arsenic, chromium, and nickel in toenail samples from Appalachian Kentucky residents.

Authors:  Nancy Johnson; Brent J Shelton; Claudia Hopenhayn; Thomas T Tucker; Jason M Unrine; Bin Huang; W Christian; Zhuo Zhang; Xianglin Shi; Li Li
Journal:  J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.567

9.  Estimation of exposure distribution adjusting for association between exposure level and detection limit.

Authors:  Yuchen Yang; Brent J Shelton; Thomas T Tucker; Li Li; Richard Kryscio; Li Chen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-05-16       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Association Between Preoperative Metformin Exposure and Postoperative Outcomes in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Katherine M Reitz; Oscar C Marroquin; Mazen S Zenati; Jason Kennedy; Mary Korytkowski; Edith Tzeng; Stephen Koscum; David Newhouse; Ricardo Martinez Garcia; Jennifer Vates; Timothy R Billiar; Brian S Zuckerbraun; Richard L Simmons; Stephen Shapiro; Christopher W Seymour; Derek C Angus; Matthew R Rosengart; Matthew D Neal
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 14.766

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.