Literature DB >> 9495687

Bias in discrepant analysis: when two wrongs don't make a right.

W C Miller1.   

Abstract

Imperfect reference standards (alloyed standards) often hinder evaluation of new diagnostic tests. Discrepant analysis, a two-stage modification of the standard evaluation of diagnostic tests, has been used to circumvent this problem. In discrepant analysis, additional testing is performed to resolve discrepant results of the new diagnostic test and the alloyed standard. This article demonstrates algebraically that sensitivity and specificity will be overestimated by discrepant analysis, even when a perfect gold standard is used to resolve the discrepant results. The magnitude of the bias depends on the true sensitivity and specificity of the new test and initial alloyed standard, the prevalence of disease in the study population, and the proportion of concordant errors between the two tests. The article also demonstrates substantial bias associated with the use of alloyed standard tests in both stages of discrepant analysis. This procedure should not be used routinely for evaluation of diagnostic tests.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9495687     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(97)00264-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  26 in total

1.  Discrepant analysis is still at large.

Authors:  M Sternberg
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Discrepant analysis: how can we test a test?

Authors:  A J McAdam
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Discrepant analysis is an inappropriate and unscientific method.

Authors:  A Hadgu
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 4.  Methods and recommendations for evaluating and reporting a new diagnostic test.

Authors:  A S Hess; M Shardell; J K Johnson; K A Thom; P Strassle; G Netzer; A D Harris
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 3.267

5.  Comparison between the Gen-Probe transcription-mediated amplification Trichomonas vaginalis research assay and real-time PCR for Trichomonas vaginalis detection using a Roche LightCycler instrument with female self-obtained vaginal swab samples and male urine samples.

Authors:  Andrew Hardick; Justin Hardick; Billie Jo Wood; Charlotte Gaydos
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by enzyme immunoassay, culture, and three nucleic acid amplification tests.

Authors:  E Van Dyck; M Ieven; S Pattyn; L Van Damme; M Laga
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Utility of composite reference standards and latent class analysis in evaluating the clinical accuracy of diagnostic tests for pertussis.

Authors:  Andrew L Baughman; Kristine M Bisgard; Margaret M Cortese; William W Thompson; Gary N Sanden; Peter M Strebel
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2007-11-07

8.  Investigation into low-level anti-rubella virus IgG results reported by commercial immunoassays.

Authors:  Wayne Dimech; Nilukshi Arachchi; Jingjing Cai; Terri Sahin; Kim Wilson
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2012-12-19

9.  Comparison of IsoCode STIX and FTA Gene Guard collection matrices as whole-blood storage and processing devices for diagnosis of malaria by PCR.

Authors:  K J Zhong; C J Salas; R Shafer; A Gubanov; R A Gasser; A J Magill; J R Forney; K C Kain
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Use of the Roche LightCycler instrument in a real-time PCR for Trichomonas vaginalis in urine samples from females and males.

Authors:  Justin Hardick; Samuel Yang; Shin Lin; Della Duncan; Charlotte Gaydos
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.