Weighted generalized score test for comparing predictive values in the presence of verification bias.
inverse probability weighting
two-phase design
verification bias
verification probability
weighted generalized score tests
Journal
Statistics in medicine
ISSN: 1097-0258
Titre abrégé: Stat Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8215016
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 10 2022
30 10 2022
Historique:
revised:
14
06
2022
received:
08
03
2022
accepted:
18
07
2022
pubmed:
6
8
2022
medline:
18
10
2022
entrez:
5
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Positive and negative predictive values of a diagnostic test are two important measures of test accuracy, which are more relevant in clinical settings than sensitivity and specificity. Statistical methods have been well-developed to compare the predictive values of two binary diagnostic tests when test results and disease status fully observed for all study patients. In practice, however, it is common that only a subset of study patients have the disease status verified due to ethical or cost considerations. Methods applied directly to the verified subjects may lead to biased results. A bias-corrected method has been developed to compare two predictive values in the presence of verification bias. However, the complexity of the existing method and the computational difficulty in implementing it has restricted its use. A simple and easily implemented statistical method is therefore needed. In this paper, we propose a weighted generalized score (WGS) test statistic for comparing two predictive values in the presence of verification bias. The proposed WGS test statistic is intuitive and simple to compute, only involving some minor modification of the WGS test statistic when disease status is verified for each study patient. Simulations demonstrate that the proposed WGS test statistic preserves type I error much better than the existing Wald statistic. The method is illustrated with data from a study of methods for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4838-4859Informations de copyright
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Kwak M, Um SW, Jung SH. Comparison of operational characteristics for binary tests with clustered data. Stat Med. 2015;34:2325-2333.
Bennett BM. On tests for equality of predictive values for t$$ t $$ diagnostic procedures. Stat Med. 1985;4:535-539.
Leisenring W, Alonzo T, Pepe MS. Comparisons of predictive values of binary medical diagnostic tests for paired designs. Biometrics. 2000;56:345-351.
Wang W, Davis CS, Soong SJ. Comparison of predictive values of two diagnostic tests from the same sample of subjects using weighted least squares. Stat Med. 2006;25:2215-2229.
Kosinski AS. A weighted generalized score statistic for comparison of predictive values of diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 2013;32:964-977.
Begg CB, Greenes RA. Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subjects to selection bias. Biometrics. 1983;39:207-215.
Zhou XH. Comparing accuracies of two screening tests in a two-phase study for dementia. J Royal Stat Soc Series C Appl Stat. 1998;47:135-147.
Alonzo TA. Verification bias-corrected estimators of the relative true and false positive rates of two binary screening tests. Stat Med. 2005;24:403-417.
Roládn Nofuentes JA, Castillo JD. The effect of verification bias on the comparison of predictive values of two binary diagnostic tests. J Stat Plan Inference. 2008;138:950-963.
Boos DD. On generalized score tests. Am Stat. 1992;46:327-333.
Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. New York: Wiley; 1989.