Literature DB >> 21626532

Random effects models for assessing diagnostic accuracy of traditional Chinese doctors in absence of a gold standard.

Zheyu Wang1, Xiao-Hua Zhou.   

Abstract

Two common problems in assessing the accuracy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) doctors in detecting a particular symptom are the unknown true symptom status and the ordinal-scale of the symptom status. Wang et al. (Biostatistics 2011; DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxq075) proposed a nonparametric maximum likelihood method for estimating the accuracy of different TCM doctors without a gold standard when the true symptom status is measured on an ordinal-scale. A key assumption of their work is that the diagnosis results are independent conditional on the gold standard. This assumption can be violated in many practical situations.In this paper, we propose a random effects modeling approach that extends their method to incorporate dependence structure among different tests or doctors. The proposed method is illustrated on a real data set from TCM, which contains the diagnostic results from five doctors for the same patients regarding symptoms related to Chills disease. The same data set was analyzed by Wang et al. under the conditional independence assumption. In addition, we also discuss an ad hoc test for the model fitting and a likelihood ratio test on the random effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21626532     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4275

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


  6 in total

1.  A crossed random effects modeling approach for estimating diagnostic accuracy from ordinal ratings without a gold standard.

Authors:  Yunlong Xie; Zhen Chen; Paul S Albert
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-03-26       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

3.  Model-based clustering for assessing the prognostic value of imaging biomarkers and mixed type tests.

Authors:  Zheyu Wang; Krisztian Sebestyen; Sarah E Monsell
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 1.681

4.  Measuring rater bias in diagnostic tests with ordinal ratings.

Authors:  Chanmin Kim; Xiaoyan Lin; Kerrie P Nelson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2021-05-09       Impact factor: 2.497

5.  Assessment of Intermingled Phlegm and Blood Stasis Syndrome in Coronary Heart Disease: Development of a Diagnostic Scale.

Authors:  Xuan Zhou; Xian-Tao Li; Xiao-Qi Liu; Bing Wang; Ge Fang
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 2.629

6.  Diagnostic test evaluation methodology: A systematic review of methods employed to evaluate diagnostic tests in the absence of gold standard - An update.

Authors:  Chinyereugo M Umemneku Chikere; Kevin Wilson; Sara Graziadio; Luke Vale; A Joy Allen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.