Literature DB >> 3913467

Sensitivity and specificity of a monitoring test.

E R DeLong, W B Vernon, R R Bollinger.   

Abstract

The usefulness of a diagnostic test is generally assessed by calculating the sensitivity and specificity, or the predictive value positive and predictive value negative of the test. When subjects are monitored periodically for evidence of disease, these calculations must incorporate the varying amounts of information per individual. If in addition, the test results lie on a continuous scale, these quantities vary with the cutoff value (cutpoint) used to define a positive test. They are usually calculated for a spectrum of potential cutpoints in order to produce receiver-operator characteristic curves. In this paper we use a partial likelihood solution to the discrete logistic model in order to obtain estimates of the diagnostic test indices and to provide a significance test when the diagnostic test is administered repeatedly to individuals.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3913467

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  10 in total

1.  Evaluating the ROC performance of markers for future events.

Authors:  Margaret S Pepe; Yingye Zheng; Yuying Jin; Ying Huang; Chirag R Parikh; Wayne C Levy
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2007-12-07       Impact factor: 1.588

2.  Evaluating diagnostic accuracy of genetic profiles in affected offspring families.

Authors:  Jerome Carayol; Frédéric Tores; Inke R König; Jörg Hager; Andreas Ziegler
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Noninvasive diagnosis of renal allograft rejections--application of an information-theoretical model.

Authors:  H Heiss; W Wild; R Margreiter; W Pfaller; P Kotanko
Journal:  Klin Wochenschr       Date:  1988-01-04

4.  Structural effects of linkage disequilibrium on the transcriptome.

Authors:  Joshua S Martin; Matthew Halvorsen; Lauren Davis-Neulander; Justin Ritz; Chetna Gopinath; Arthur Beauregard; Alain Laederach
Journal:  RNA       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 4.942

5.  Assessing the impact of a combined analysis of four common low-risk genetic variants on autism risk.

Authors:  Jerome Carayol; Gerard D Schellenberg; Frederic Tores; Jörg Hager; Andreas Ziegler; Geraldine Dawson
Journal:  Mol Autism       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 7.509

6.  Diagnostic Utility of Gene Expression Profiles.

Authors:  Chengjie Xiong; Yan Yan; Feng Gao
Journal:  J Biom Biostat       Date:  2013-01-04

7.  Deep Learning-Based Method to Differentiate Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder From Multiple Sclerosis.

Authors:  Hyunjin Kim; Youngin Lee; Yong-Hwan Kim; Young-Min Lim; Ji Sung Lee; Jincheol Woo; Su-Kyeong Jang; Yeo Jin Oh; Hye Weon Kim; Eun-Jae Lee; Dong-Wha Kang; Kwang-Kuk Kim
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 8.  What methods are being used to create an evidence base on the use of laboratory tests to monitor long-term conditions in primary care? A scoping review.

Authors:  Martha M C Elwenspoek; Lauren J Scott; Katharine Alsop; Rita Patel; Jessica C Watson; Ed Mann; Penny Whiting
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2020-11-28       Impact factor: 2.267

9.  Cuffless Blood Pressure Measurement Using a Smartphone-Case Based ECG Monitor with Photoplethysmography in Hypertensive Patients.

Authors:  Zhanna Sagirova; Natalia Kuznetsova; Nana Gogiberidze; Daria Gognieva; Aleksandr Suvorov; Petr Chomakhidze; Stefano Omboni; Hugo Saner; Philippe Kopylov
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  Sernbo score predicts survival after intracapsular hip fracture in the elderly.

Authors:  E J C Dawe; E Lindisfarne; T Singh; I McFadyen; P Stott
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.891

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.