Literature DB >> 23243483

Bayesian decision analysis for choosing between diagnostic/prognostic prediction procedures.

John Kornak1, Ying Lu.   

Abstract

New diagnostic procedures and prognostic markers are continually being developed for a wide range of medical complaints. Medical institutions are therefore regularly faced with the decision as to whether to replace an existing procedure with a new one. The decision to adopt a new method is primarily based on diagnostic/predictive accuracy and cost-effectiveness, but this trade-off is not usually considered in a formal decision-theoretic way. The decision process for diagnostic procedures is complicated by the fact that diagnostic decisions are typically based on thresholding one or more continuous variables. Therefore, a formal decision process should account for uncertainty in the optimal threshold value for each diagnostic procedure. We here propose a Bayesian decision approach based on maximizing expected utility (incorporating accuracy and costs) with respect to diagnostic procedure and threshold level simultaneously. The Bayesian decision approach is illustrated via an application comparing the utility of different bone mineral density (BMD) measurements for determining the need for preventative treatment of osteoporotic hip fracture in elderly patients.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 23243483      PMCID: PMC3520495          DOI: 10.4310/sii.2011.v4.n1.a4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Interface        ISSN: 1938-7989            Impact factor:   0.582


  38 in total

1.  The sample size for a clinical trial: a Bayesian-decision theoretic approach.

Authors:  J Halpern; B W Brown; J Hornberger
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D.

Authors:  K Burström; M Johannesson; F Diderichsen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  A framework for cost-effectiveness analysis from clinical trial data.

Authors:  A O'Hagan; J W Stevens
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  A procedure for determining whether a simple combination of diagnostic tests may be noninferior to the theoretical optimum combination.

Authors:  Hua Jin; Ying Lu
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2008-06-12       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Bayesian analysis of stress thallium-201 scintigraphy.

Authors:  R G Murray; J H McKillop; R G Bessent; I Hutton; A R Lorimer; T D Lawrie
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1981

6.  Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

Authors:  S R Cummings; D M Black; M C Nevitt; W Browner; J Cauley; K Ensrud; H K Genant; L Palermo; J Scott; T M Vogt
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-01-09       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Measuring population health: a comparison of three generic health status measures.

Authors:  Susan Macran; Helen Weatherly; Paul Kind
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Mortality, disability, and nursing home use for persons with and without hip fracture: a population-based study.

Authors:  Cynthia L Leibson; Anna N A Tosteson; Sherine E Gabriel; Jeanine E Ransom; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.562

9.  Permutation test for non-inferiority of the linear to the optimal combination of multiple tests.

Authors:  Hua Jin; Ying Lu
Journal:  Stat Probab Lett       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 0.870

10.  Cost-effectiveness of preventative therapies for postmenopausal women with osteopenia.

Authors:  Eric S Meadows; Robert Klein; Matthew D Rousculp; Lee Smolen; Robert L Ohsfeldt; Joseph A Johnston
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2007-04-17       Impact factor: 2.809

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  On determining the most appropriate test cut-off value: the case of tests with continuous results.

Authors:  Farrokh Habibzadeh; Parham Habibzadeh; Mahboobeh Yadollahie
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2016-10-15       Impact factor: 2.313

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.