Literature DB >> 7539300

Evaluating multiple diagnostic tests with partial verification.

S G Baker1.   

Abstract

To evaluate diagnostic tests, one would ideally like to verify, for example, with a biopsy, the disease state of all subjects in a study. Often, however, no all subjects are verified. Previous methods for evaluation assume that the decision to verify depends only on recorded variables. Sometimes, particularly if the disease process is not well understood, the decision to verify may also depend on unrecorded variables related to disease. We propose a method to estimate the true- and false-positive rates of multiple tests while adjusting for the effect, on the decision to verify, of unrecorded variables related to disease. To put the estimates into a more usable form, we develop a simple algorithm for creating a receiver-operating curve which maximizes the true-positive rate, given the false-positive rate. We apply the methodology to data on the early detection of prostate cancer using ultrasonography, digital rectal exam, and prostate specific antigen.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7539300

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


  13 in total

1.  Bias in estimating accuracy of a binary screening test with differential disease verification.

Authors:  Todd A Alonzo; John T Brinton; Brandy M Ringham; Deborah H Glueck
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  On Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy From Studies With Multiple Raters and Partial Gold Standard Evaluation.

Authors:  Paul S Albert; Lori E Dodd
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 5.033

3.  A new method to address verification bias in studies of clinical screening tests: cervical cancer screening assays as an example.

Authors:  Xiaonan Xue; Mimi Y Kim; Philip E Castle; Howard D Strickler
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  A hybrid Bayesian hierarchical model combining cohort and case-control studies for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests: Accounting for partial verification bias.

Authors:  Xiaoye Ma; Yong Chen; Stephen R Cole; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2014-05-26       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  Estimating the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of two diagnostic tests when one test is conducted on only a subsample of specimens.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki; Yan Li; David W Edelstein; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-12-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  A model for adjusting for nonignorable verification bias in estimation of the ROC curve and its area with likelihood-based approach.

Authors:  Danping Liu; Xiao-Hua Zhou
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Direct estimation of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in the presence of verification bias.

Authors:  Hua He; Jeffrey M Lyness; Michael P McDermott
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-02-01       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 8.  Estimation of diagnostic test accuracy without full verification: a review of latent class methods.

Authors:  John Collins; Minh Huynh
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Estimation of the ROC curve under verification bias.

Authors:  Ronen Fluss; Benjamin Reiser; David Faraggi; Andrea Rotnitzky
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.207

10.  Estimation of the disease-specific diagnostic marker distribution under verification bias.

Authors:  John H Page; Andrea Rotnitzky
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 1.681

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.