首页> 外文期刊>Clinical Chemistry: Journal of the American Association for Clinical Chemists >Validity of linear regression in method comparison studies: is it limited by the statistical model or the quality of the analytical input data?
【24h】

Validity of linear regression in method comparison studies: is it limited by the statistical model or the quality of the analytical input data?

机译:线性回归在方法比较研究中的有效性:是否受统计模型或分析输入数据质量的限制?

获取原文
           

摘要

We compared the application of ordinary linear regression, Deming regression, standardized principal component analysis, and Passing–Bablok regression to real-life method comparison studies to investigate whether the statistical model of regression or the analytical input data have more influence on the validity of the regression estimates. We took measurements of serum potassium as an example for comparisons that cover a narrow data range and measurements of serum estradiol-17β as an example for comparisons that cover a wide data range. We demonstrate that, in practice, it is not the statistical model but the quality of the analytical input data that is crucial for interpretation of method comparison studies. We show the usefulness of ordinary linear regression, in particular, because it gives a better estimate of the standard deviation of the residuals than the other procedures. The latter is important for distinguishing whether the observed spread across the regression line is caused by the analytical imprecision alone or whether sample-related effects also contribute. We further demonstrate the usefulness of linear correlation analysis as a first screening test for the validity of linear regression data. When ordinary linear regression (in combination with correlation analysis) gives poor estimates, we recommend investigating the analytical reason for the poor performance instead of assuming that other linear regression procedures add substantial value to the interpretation of the study. This investigation should address whether ( a ) the x and y data are linearly related; ( b ) the total analytical imprecision ( s a,tot) is responsible for the poor correlation; ( c ) sample-related effects are present (standard deviation of the residuals ? sa,tot); ( d ) the samples are adequately distributed over the investigated range; and ( e ) the number of samples used for the comparison is adequate.
机译:我们将普通线性回归,戴明回归,标准化主成分分析和Passing-Bablok回归在实际方法比较研究中的应用进行了比较,以研究回归的统计模型或分析输入数据是否对方法的有效性产生更大的影响。回归估计。我们以血清钾的测定为例,比较了一个狭窄的数据范围,以血清雌二醇-17β为例子,比较了一个宽数据范围。我们证明,实际上,对于解释方法比较研究至关重要的不是统计模型,而是分析输入数据的质量。我们展示了普通线性回归的有用性,特别是因为它比其他过程可以更好地估计残差的标准偏差。后者对于区分观察到的跨回归线的散布是仅由分析不精确性引起还是与样本相关的影响也起重要作用。我们进一步证明了线性相关分析作为线性回归数据有效性的首次筛选测试的有用性。当普通线性回归(结合相关分析)给出较差的估计值时,我们建议调查性能不佳的分析原因,而不是假设其他线性回归程序会为研究的解释增加实质性价值。此调查应解决(a)x和y数据是否线性相关; (b)总体分析不精确度(s a,tot)是造成相关性差的原因; (c)存在与样品有关的影响(残差的标准偏差?sa,tot); (d)样品在研究范围内充分分布; (e)用于比较的样本数量足够。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号