Literature DB >> 22717591

Hypothesis testing in noninferiority and equivalence MRMC ROC studies.

Weijie Chen1, Nicholas A Petrick, Berkman Sahiner.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: Conventional multireader multicase receiver operating characteristic (MRMC ROC) methodologies use hypothesis testing to test differences in diagnostic accuracies among several imaging modalities. The general MRMC-ROC analysis framework is designed to show that one modality is statistically different among a set of competing modalities (ie, the superiority setting). In practice, one may wish to show that the diagnostic accuracy of a modality is noninferior or equivalent, in a statistical sense, to that of another modality instead of showing its superiority (a higher bar). The purpose of this article is to investigate the appropriate adjustments to the conventional MRMC ROC hypothesis testing methodology for the design and analysis of noninferiority and equivalence hypothesis tests.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We present three methodological adjustments to the updated and unified Obuchowski-Rockette (OR)/Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz (DBM) MRMC ROC method for use in statistical noninferiority/equivalence testing: 1) the appropriate statement of the null and alternative hypotheses; 2) a method for analyzing the experimental data; and 3) a method for sizing MRMC noninferiority/equivalence studies. We provide a clinical example to further illustrate the analysis of and sizing/power calculation for noninferiority MRMC ROC studies and give some insights on the interplay of effect size, noninferiority margin parameter, and sample sizes.
RESULTS: We provide detailed analysis and sizing computation procedures for a noninferiority MRMC ROC study using our method adjusted from the updated and unified OR/DBM MRMC method. Likewise, we show that an equivalence hypothesis test is identical to performing two simultaneous noninferiority tests (ie, either modality is noninferior to the other).
CONCLUSION: Conventional MRMC ROC methodology developed for superiority studies can and should be adjusted appropriately for the design and analysis of a noninferiority/equivalence hypothesis testing. In addition, the confidence interval of the difference in diagnostic accuracies is important information and should generally accompany the statistical analysis and any conclusions drawn from the hypothesis testing. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22717591     DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  13 in total

1.  Multireader multicase reader studies with binary agreement data: simulation, analysis, validation, and sizing.

Authors:  Weijie Chen; Adam Wunderlich; Nicholas Petrick; Brandon D Gallas
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-12-04

2.  Stand-Alone Artificial Intelligence for Breast Cancer Detection in Mammography: Comparison With 101 Radiologists.

Authors:  Alejandro Rodriguez-Ruiz; Kristina Lång; Albert Gubern-Merida; Mireille Broeders; Gisella Gennaro; Paola Clauser; Thomas H Helbich; Margarita Chevalier; Tao Tan; Thomas Mertelmeier; Matthew G Wallis; Ingvar Andersson; Sophia Zackrisson; Ritse M Mann; Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Can We Perform CT of the Appendix with Less Than 1 mSv? A De-escalating Dose-simulation Study.

Authors:  Ji Hoon Park; Jong-June Jeon; Sung Soo Lee; Amar C Dhanantwari; Ji Ye Sim; Hae Young Kim; Kyoung Ho Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Combination of one-view digital breast tomosynthesis with one-view digital mammography versus standard two-view digital mammography: per lesion analysis.

Authors:  Gisella Gennaro; R Edward Hendrick; Alicia Toledano; Jean R Paquelet; Elisabetta Bezzon; Roberta Chersevani; Cosimo di Maggio; Manuela La Grassa; Luigi Pescarini; Ilaria Polico; Alessandro Proietti; Enrica Baldan; Fabio Pomerri; Pier Carlo Muzzio
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Observer Performance in the Detection and Classification of Malignant Hepatic Nodules and Masses with CT Image-Space Denoising and Iterative Reconstruction.

Authors:  Joel G Fletcher; Lifeng Yu; Zhoubo Li; Armando Manduca; Daniel J Blezek; David M Hough; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Gregory C Brickner; Joseph C Cernigliaro; Amy K Hara; Jeff L Fidler; David S Lake; Maria Shiung; David Lewis; Shuai Leng; Kurt E Augustine; Rickey E Carter; David R Holmes; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Demonstration of Multi- and Single-Reader Sample Size Program for Diagnostic Studies software.

Authors:  Stephen L Hillis; Kevin M Schartz
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2015-03-17

7.  DeepAMO: a multi-slice, multi-view anthropomorphic model observer for visual detection tasks performed on volume images.

Authors:  Ye Li; Junyu Chen; Justin L Brown; S Ted Treves; Xinhua Cao; Frederic H Fahey; George Sgouros; Wesley E Bolch; Eric C Frey
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-01-28

8.  Ruling Out Brain CT Contraindications prior to Intravenous Thrombolysis: Diagnostic Equivalence between a Primary Interpretation Workstation and a Mobile Tablet Computer.

Authors:  Antonio J Salazar; Nicolás Useche; Manuel Granja; Aníbal J Morillo; Sonia Bermúdez
Journal:  Int J Telemed Appl       Date:  2017-11-09

9.  Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services.

Authors:  Antonio J Salazar; Javier A Romero; Oscar A Bernal; Angela P Moreno; Sofía C Velasco; Xavier A Díaz
Journal:  Int J Telemed Appl       Date:  2016-09-29

10.  Effect of reconstruction methods and x-ray tube current-time product on nodule detection in an anthropomorphic thorax phantom: A crossed-modality JAFROC observer study.

Authors:  J D Thompson; D P Chakraborty; K Szczepura; A K Tootell; I Vamvakas; D J Manning; P Hogg
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.