Literature DB >> 20552570

Sample size calculations for evaluating a diagnostic test when the gold standard is missing at random.

Andrzej S Kosinski1, Ying Chen, Robert H Lyles.   

Abstract

Performance of a diagnostic test is ideally evaluated by a comparison of the test results to a gold standard for all the patients in a study. In practice, however, it is common for a subset of study patients to have the gold standard not verified (missing) due to ethical or expense considerations. Sensitivity and specificity are often used as the relevant test performance measures and a joint confidence region (CR) for sensitivity and specificity can summarize the precision of estimates. In this paper, we present an approach to sample size computations when designing a study in which the gold standard is considered to be missing at random (MAR). We calculate the needed increase in sample size to ensure that the joint CR under MAR falls inside the boundaries of the joint CR derived for data with no missingness present. Copyright 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20552570     DOI: 10.1002/sim.3899

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


  2 in total

1.  Estimating the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of two diagnostic tests when one test is conducted on only a subsample of specimens.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki; Yan Li; David W Edelstein; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-12-04       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Estimation of diagnostic test accuracy without full verification: a review of latent class methods.

Authors:  John Collins; Minh Huynh
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 2.373

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.