首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparative diagnostic accuracy studies with an imperfect reference standard – a comparison of correction methods
【2h】

Comparative diagnostic accuracy studies with an imperfect reference standard – a comparison of correction methods

机译:具有不完美参考标准的比较诊断准确性研究 - 校正方法的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Abstract Background Staquet et al. and Brenner both developed correction methods to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of a binary-response index test when the reference standard is imperfect and its sensitivity and specificity are known. However, to our knowledge, no study has compared the statistical properties of these methods, despite their long application in diagnostic accuracy studies. Aim To compare the correction methods developed by Staquet et al. and Brenner. Methods Simulations techniques were employed to compare the methods under assumptions that the new test and the reference standard are conditionally independent or dependent given the true disease status of an individual. Three clinical datasets were analysed to understand the impact of using each method to inform clinical decision-making. Results Under the assumption of conditional independence, the Staquet et al. correction method outperforms the Brenner correction method irrespective of the prevalence of disease and whether the performance of the reference standard is better or worse than the index test. However, when the prevalence of the disease is high (> 0.9) or low (< 0.1), the Staquet et al. correction method can produce illogical results (i.e. results outside [0,1]). Under the assumption of conditional dependence; both methods failed to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of the index test especially when the covariance terms between the index test and the reference standard is not close to zero. Conclusion When the new test and the imperfect reference standard are conditionally independent, and the sensitivity and specificity of the imperfect reference standard are known, the Staquet et al. correction method outperforms the Brenner method. However, where the prevalence of the target condition is very high or low or the two tests are conditionally dependent, other statistical methods such as latent class approaches should be considered.
机译:抽象背景staquet等人。并且Brenner两者都发育了校正方法,以估计当参考标准不完美时二进制响应指数测试的敏感性和特异性,并且其敏感性和特异性是已知的。然而,对于我们的知识,尽管他们在诊断准确性研究中应用了这些方法的统计特性,但没有研究。旨在比较Staquet等人开发的校正方法。和布伦纳。方法采用仿真技术将新测试和参考标准的假设下的方法进行比较,条件性独立或依赖于个人的真实疾病状态。分析了三个临床数据集以了解使用每种方法通知临床决策的影响。在条件独立的假设下,STAQUET等人。校正方法不论疾病的患病率以及参考标准的性能是否优于指数试验,校正方法效果优于勃兰纳校正方法。然而,当疾病的患病率高(> 0.9)或低(<0.1)时,STAQUET等人。校正方法可以产生不合逻辑的结果(即:在[0,1]之外的结果)。在有条件依赖的假设下;两种方法都未能估计指数测试的灵敏度和特异性,特别是当指数测试和参考标准之间的协方差术语不接近零时。结论当新测试和不完美的参考标准有条件独立时,已知STAQUET等人的敏感性参考标准的灵敏度和特异性。校正方法优于Brenner方法。然而,在目标条件的患病率非常高或低或两次测试是有条件地相关的情况下,应考虑其他统计方法,例如潜在的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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