Literature DB >> 26234584

A mixed effect model for bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies using a copula representation of the random effects distribution.

Aristidis K Nikoloulopoulos1.   

Abstract

Diagnostic test accuracy studies typically report the number of true positives, false positives, true negatives and false negatives. There usually exists a negative association between the number of true positives and true negatives, because studies that adopt less stringent criterion for declaring a test positive invoke higher sensitivities and lower specificities. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) is currently recommended to synthesize diagnostic test accuracy studies. We propose a copula mixed model for bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. Our general model includes the GLMM as a special case and can also operate on the original scale of sensitivity and specificity. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves are deduced for the proposed model through quantile regression techniques and different characterizations of the bivariate random effects distribution. Our general methodology is demonstrated with an extensive simulation study and illustrated by re-analysing the data of two published meta-analyses. Our study suggests that there can be an improvement on GLMM in fit to data and makes the argument for moving to copula random effects models. Our modelling framework is implemented in the package CopulaREMADA within the open source statistical environment R.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  SROC, sensitivity/specificity; copula models; diagnostic tests; multivariate meta-analysis; random effects models

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26234584     DOI: 10.1002/sim.6595

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


  4 in total

1.  A double SIMEX approach for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Annamaria Guolo
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 2.  When should meta-analysis avoid making hidden normality assumptions?

Authors:  Dan Jackson; Ian R White
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 2.207

3.  A multinomial quadrivariate D-vine copula mixed model for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies in the presence of non-evaluable subjects.

Authors:  Aristidis K Nikoloulopoulos
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 3.021

4.  Multivariate and network meta-analysis of multiple outcomes and multiple treatments: rationale, concepts, and examples.

Authors:  Richard D Riley; Dan Jackson; Georgia Salanti; Danielle L Burke; Malcolm Price; Jamie Kirkham; Ian R White
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-09-13
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.