Literature DB >> 9550567

Quantifying the bias associated with use of discrepant analysis.

H B Lipman1, J R Astles.   

Abstract

Discrepant analysis is a widely used technique for estimating the performance parameters of a laboratory test. In discrepant analysis, each specimen is initially tested with the candidate test and a comparison method, and when the results of the two tests disagree, a confirmatory test is used to resolve the discrepancy. Discrepant analysis usually produces biased estimates. This report quantifies this bias and shows that it is usually positive, leading to overestimation of the performance parameters of a laboratory test. The direction and magnitude of the bias are predictably influenced by the analytical sensitivity and specificity of the candidate test, comparison method, and confirmatory test. The proportion of abnormal specimens tested also affects the magnitude of the bias, particularly the estimates of analytical sensitivity and positive predictive value when this proportion is low. Alternative approaches are suggested.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9550567

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  9 in total

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

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

Review 2.  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

3.  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

4.  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

5.  Validation of a next-generation sequencing assay for clinical molecular oncology.

Authors:  Catherine E Cottrell; Hussam Al-Kateb; Andrew J Bredemeyer; Eric J Duncavage; David H Spencer; Haley J Abel; Christina M Lockwood; Ian S Hagemann; Stephanie M O'Guin; Lauren C Burcea; Christopher S Sawyer; Dayna M Oschwald; Jennifer L Stratman; Dorie A Sher; Mark R Johnson; Justin T Brown; Paul F Cliften; Bijoy George; Leslie D McIntosh; Savita Shrivastava; Tudung T Nguyen; Jacqueline E Payton; Mark A Watson; Seth D Crosby; Richard D Head; Robi D Mitra; Rakesh Nagarajan; Shashikant Kulkarni; Karen Seibert; Herbert W Virgin; Jeffrey Milbrandt; John D Pfeifer
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2013-11-06       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 6.  Guidelines for Validation of Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Oncology Panels: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and College of American Pathologists.

Authors:  Lawrence J Jennings; Maria E Arcila; Christopher Corless; Suzanne Kamel-Reid; Ira M Lubin; John Pfeifer; Robyn L Temple-Smolkin; Karl V Voelkerding; Marina N Nikiforova
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 5.568

7.  Diagnosis of Visceral Leishmaniasis Using Peripheral Blood Microscopy in Ethiopia: A Prospective Phase-III Study of the Diagnostic Performance of Different Concentration Techniques Compared to Tissue Aspiration.

Authors:  Ermias Diro; Cedric P Yansouni; Yegnasew Takele; Bewketu Mengesha; Lutgarde Lynen; Asrat Hailu; Johan van Griensven; Marleen Boelaert; Philippe Büscher
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 2.345

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.  Bayesian Evaluation of Solana HSV 1+2/VZV Assay Compared to Viral Culture and Commercial PCR Assay for Cutaneous or Mucocutaneous Specimens.

Authors:  Christine Arsenault; Félix Camirand Lemyre; Philippe Martin; Simon Lévesque
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 5.948

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.