Literature DB >> 7851336

ROC curve regression analysis: the use of ordinal regression models for diagnostic test assessment.

A N Tosteson1, M C Weinstein, J Wittenberg, C B Begg.   

Abstract

Diagnostic tests commonly are characterized by their true positive (sensitivity) and true negative (specificity) classification rates, which rely on a single decision threshold to classify a test result as positive. A more complete description of test accuracy is given by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, a graph of the false positive and true positive rates obtained as the decision threshold is varied. A generalized regression methodology, which uses a class of ordinal regression models to estimate smoothed ROC curves has been described. Data from a multi-institutional study comparing the accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with computed tomography (CT) in detecting liver metastases, which are ideally suited for ROC regression analysis, are described. The general regression model is introduced and an estimate for the area under the ROC curve and its standard error using parameters of the ordinal regression model is given. An analysis of the liver data that highlights the utility of the methodology in parsimoniously adjusting comparisons for covariates is presented.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7851336      PMCID: PMC1566538          DOI: 10.1289/ehp.94102s873

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Health Perspect        ISSN: 0091-6765            Impact factor:   9.031


  7 in total

Review 1.  ROC methodology in radiologic imaging.

Authors:  C E Metz
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 6.016

2.  Biases in the assessment of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  C B Begg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Assessment of radiologic tests: control of bias and other design considerations.

Authors:  C B Begg; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  A general regression methodology for ROC curve estimation.

Authors:  A N Tosteson; C B Begg
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1988 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Indices of discrimination or diagnostic accuracy: their ROCs and implied models.

Authors:  J A Swets
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 17.737

6.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

  7 in total
  7 in total

1.  Basic problems of serological laboratory diagnosis.

Authors:  W Fierz
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  1999-12-01       Impact factor: 2.695

2.  Prediction based classification for longitudinal biomarkers.

Authors:  A S Foulkes; L Azzoni; X Li; M A Johnson; C Smith; K Mounzer; L J Montaner
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.083

Review 3.  A readers' guide to the interpretation of diagnostic test properties: clinical example of sepsis.

Authors:  Joachim E Fischer; Lucas M Bachmann; Roman Jaeschke
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2003-05-07       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Histopathologic Findings on Implantation Renal Allograft Biopsies Correlate With Kidney Donor Profile Index and 30-Day Serum Creatinine.

Authors:  L-X Chen; L C Francalacci; H Bang; A De Mattos; R V Perez; K-Y Jen
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2019-01-10       Impact factor: 1.066

5.  A head to head evaluation of 8 biochemical scanning tools for unmeasured ions.

Authors:  Thomas J Morgan; Chris M Anstey; Matthew B Wolf
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 2.502

6.  Can Ratios Between Prognostic Factors Predict the Clinical Pregnancy Rate in an IVF/ICSI Program with a GnRH Agonist-FSH/hMG Protocol? An Assessment of 2421 Embryo Transfers, and a Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Philippe Merviel; Michel Menard; Rosalie Cabry; Florence Scheffler; Emmanuelle Lourdel; Marie-Thérèse Le Martelot; Sylvie Roche; Jean-Jacques Chabaud; Henri Copin; Hortense Drapier; Moncef Benkhalifa; Damien Beauvillard
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-09-04       Impact factor: 3.060

7.  Effect of previous benign breast biopsy on the interpretive performance of subsequent screening mammography.

Authors:  Stephen H Taplin; L Abraham; B M Geller; B C Yankaskas; D S M Buist; R Smith-Bindman; C Lehman; D Weaver; P A Carney; W E Barlow
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-07-02       Impact factor: 13.506

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.