Literature DB >> 23661263

A Bayesian approach to strengthen inference for case-control studies with multiple error-prone exposure assessments.

Jing Zhang1, Stephen R Cole, David B Richardson, Haitao Chu.   

Abstract

In case-control studies, exposure assessments are almost always error-prone. In the absence of a gold standard, two or more assessment approaches are often used to classify people with respect to exposure. Each imperfect assessment tool may lead to misclassification of exposure assignment; the exposure misclassification may be differential with respect to case status or not; and, the errors in exposure classification under the different approaches may be independent (conditional upon the true exposure status) or not. Although methods have been proposed to study diagnostic accuracy in the absence of a gold standard, these methods are infrequently used in case-control studies to correct exposure misclassification that is simultaneously differential and dependent. In this paper, we proposed a Bayesian method to estimate the measurement-error corrected exposure-disease association, accounting for both differential and dependent misclassification. The performance of the proposed method is investigated using simulations, which show that the proposed approach works well, as well as an application to a case-control study assessing the association between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma.
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  case-control study; dependent; differential; gold standard; misclassification

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23661263      PMCID: PMC3788843          DOI: 10.1002/sim.5842

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


  22 in total

1.  [Validity of occupational histories from proxy respondents].

Authors:  R Cordeiro
Journal:  Rev Saude Publica       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.106

2.  Validation of expert assessment of occupational exposures.

Authors:  Lin Fritschi; Louise Nadon; Geza Benke; Ramzan Lakhani; Benoit Latreille; Marie-Elise Parent; Jack Siemiatycki
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.214

3.  Assessing exposure misclassification by expert assessment in multicenter occupational studies.

Authors:  Andrea 't Mannetje; Joelle Fevotte; Tony Fletcher; Paul Brennan; Joszef Legoza; Maria Szeremi; Ana Paldy; Slawomir Brzeznicki; Jan Gromiec; Carmen Ruxanda-Artenie; Rodica Stanescu-Dumitru; Nicolai Ivanov; Raphael Shterengorz; Lubica Hettychova; Daniela Krizanova; Adrian Cassidy; Martie van Tongeren; Paolo Boffetta
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  A cautionary note on the robustness of latent class models for estimating diagnostic error without a gold standard.

Authors:  Paul S Albert; Lori E Dodd
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Differential misclassification arising from nondifferential errors in exposure measurement.

Authors:  K M Flegal; P M Keyl; F J Nieto
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1991-11-15       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Identifiability of models for multiple diagnostic testing in the absence of a gold standard.

Authors:  Geoffrey Jones; Wesley O Johnson; Timothy E Hanson; Ronald Christensen
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Using latent class models to characterize and assess relative error in discrete measurements.

Authors:  M A Espeland; S L Handelman
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  P M Vacek
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  S L Hui; S D Walter
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  A validation of questionnaire information on occupational exposure and smoking.

Authors:  G Pershagen; O Axelson
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 5.024

View more
  5 in total

1.  A Bayesian approach for correcting exposure misclassification in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qinshu Lian; James S Hodges; Richard MacLehose; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-09-24       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Flexibly Accounting for Exposure Misclassification With External Validation Data.

Authors:  Jessie K Edwards; Stephen R Cole; Matthew P Fox
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  A general framework for comparative Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic studies.

Authors:  Joris Menten; Emmanuel Lesaffre
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  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

5.  Diagnostic accuracy and prediction increment of markers of epithelial-mesenchymal transition to assess cancer cell detachment from primary tumors.

Authors:  Evan L Busch; Prabhani Kuruppumullage Don; Haitao Chu; David B Richardson; Temitope O Keku; David A Eberhard; Christy L Avery; Robert S Sandler
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 4.430

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.