Literature DB >> 28586407

A Bayesian hierarchical model for network meta-analysis of multiple diagnostic tests.

Xiaoye Ma1, Qinshu Lian1, Haitao Chu1, Joseph G Ibrahim2, Yong Chen3.   

Abstract

To compare the accuracy of multiple diagnostic tests in a single study, three designs are commonly used (i) the multiple test comparison design; (ii) the randomized design, and (iii) the non-comparative design. Existing meta-analysis methods of diagnostic tests (MA-DT) have been focused on evaluating the performance of a single test by comparing it with a reference test. The increasing number of available diagnostic instruments for a disease condition and the different study designs being used have generated the need to develop efficient and flexible meta-analysis framework to combine all designs for simultaneous inference. In this article, we develop a missing data framework and a Bayesian hierarchical model for network MA-DT (NMA-DT) and offer important promises over traditional MA-DT: (i) It combines studies using all three designs; (ii) It pools both studies with or without a gold standard; (iii) it combines studies with different sets of candidate tests; and (iv) it accounts for heterogeneity across studies and complex correlation structure among multiple tests. We illustrate our method through a case study: network meta-analysis of deep vein thrombosis tests.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diagnostic test; Hierarchical model; Missing data; Multiple test comparison; Network meta-analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28586407      PMCID: PMC6454495          DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxx025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biostatistics        ISSN: 1465-4644            Impact factor:   5.899


  26 in total

1.  A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations.

Authors:  C M Rutter; C A Gatsonis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews.

Authors:  Johannes B Reitsma; Afina S Glas; Anne W S Rutjes; Rob J P M Scholten; Patrick M Bossuyt; Aeilko H Zwinderman
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Roger M Harbord; Jonathan J Deeks; Matthias Egger; Penny Whiting; Jonathan A C Sterne
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2006-05-11       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Stephen R Cole
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-09-28       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence: alternative parameterizations and model selection.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Lei Nie; Stephen R Cole; Charles Poole
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  A probit latent class model with general correlation structures for evaluating accuracy of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Huiping Xu; Bruce A Craig
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Meta-analysis of diagnostic studies: a comparison of random intercept, normal-normal, and binomial-normal bivariate summary ROC approaches.

Authors:  Taye H Hamza; Johannes B Reitsma; Theo Stijnen
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2008-08-27       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  Random Effects Models in a Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of Two Diagnostic Tests Without a Gold Standard.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Sining Chen; Thomas A Louis
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 5.033

Review 9.  Diagnostic test accuracy may vary with prevalence: implications for evidence-based diagnosis.

Authors:  Mariska M G Leeflang; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Les Irwig
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-09-07       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons.

Authors:  G Lu; A E Ades
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-10-30       Impact factor: 2.373

View more
  8 in total

1.  A Bayesian Hierarchical CACE Model Accounting for Incomplete Noncompliance With Application to a Meta-analysis of Epidural Analgesia on Cesarean Section.

Authors:  Jincheng Zhou; James S Hodges; Haitao Chu
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 5.033

2.  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

3.  A Bayesian multivariate meta-analysis of prevalence data.

Authors:  Lianne Siegel; Kyle Rudser; Siobhan Sutcliffe; Alayne Markland; Linda Brubaker; Sheila Gahagan; Ann E Stapleton; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions.

Authors:  Mariska M G Leeflang; Johannes B Reitsma
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2018-09-10

5.  Empirical comparisons of meta-analysis methods for diagnostic studies: a meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  Kristine J Rosenberger; Haitao Chu; Lifeng Lin
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 3.006

6.  TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews.

Authors:  Sue Mallett; Jacqueline Dinnes; Yemisi Takwoingi; Lavinia Ferrante de Ruffano
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2022-09-22

7.  Meta-analysis of dichotomous and ordinal tests with an imperfect gold standard.

Authors:  Enzo Cerullo; Hayley E Jones; Olivia Carter; Terry J Quinn; Nicola J Cooper; Alex J Sutton
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Network Meta-Analysis: Noninvasive Imaging Modalities for Identifying Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension.

Authors:  Yang Hai; Weelic Chong; John R Eisenbrey; Flemming Forsberg
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 3.487

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.