Validation of the summary ROC for diagnostic test meta-analysis: A Monte Carlo simulation

被引:25
|
作者
Mitchell, MD [1 ]
机构
[1] ECRI, Technol Assessment Grp, Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 USA
关键词
data analysis; receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC); meta-analysis;
D O I
10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80784-5
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Rationale and Objectives. The author performed this study to test a technique for validating the logit regression method for summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) meta-analysis, perform initial validation studies, and identify areas for further investigation. Materials and Methods. Monte Carlo simulation was performed by using a custom macro program for a personal computer spreadsheet. The program creates simulated data sets based on user-specified parameters, performs a meta-analysis on the data sets, and logs the results so the accuracy and variability of the method can be measured. The program can also be used to measure the effects of changes in study design and meta-analysis parameters. Results. For the base case of a small meta-analysis (10 studies) of small trials (mean, 50 patients), the meta-analysis results closely matched the input sensitivity and specificity when they were less than 80%. Systematic errors, if any, were small. At sensitivities and specificities greater than 80%, the true sensitivity or specificity was underestimated by up to 2% in the meta-analysis. Confidence intervals calculated with the summary ROC curve were reasonably conservative, although they too fell below the true results when sensitivity or specificity was greater than 80%. The underestimation was eliminated when the simulation was repeated for a much larger trial (mean, 1,000 cases per study)-even with a sensitivity and specificity of 98%. Conclusion. The Littenberg-Moses method for summary ROC meta-analysis is effective for obtaining an accurate summary estimate of diagnostic test performance, although the continuity correction introduces a small downward bias in the meta-analysis of small trials.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / 31
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Consequences of effect size heterogeneity for meta-analysis: a Monte Carlo study
    Mark J. Koetse
    Raymond J. G. M. Florax
    Henri L. F. de Groot
    Statistical Methods and Applications, 2010, 19 : 217 - 236
  • [32] Consequences of effect size heterogeneity for meta-analysis: a Monte Carlo study
    Koetse, Mark J.
    Florax, Raymond J. G. M.
    de Groot, Henri L. F.
    STATISTICAL METHODS AND APPLICATIONS, 2010, 19 (02): : 217 - 236
  • [33] Epistasis Test in Meta-Analysis: A Multi-Parameter Markov Chain Monte Carlo Model for Consistency of Evidence
    Lin, Chin
    Chu, Chi-Ming
    Su, Sui-Lung
    PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (04):
  • [34] Validation of Monte Carlo simulation for discontinuity locations in space
    Zheng, Jun
    Deng, Jianhui
    Zhang, Guoqiang
    Yang, Xiaojuan
    COMPUTERS AND GEOTECHNICS, 2015, 67 : 103 - 109
  • [35] Validation of Compton Scattering Monte Carlo Simulation Models
    Weidenspointner, Georg
    Batic, Matej
    Hauf, Steffen
    Hoff, Gabriela
    Kuster, Markus
    Pia, Maria Grazia
    Aracco, Paolo S.
    2013 IEEE NUCLEAR SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM AND MEDICAL IMAGING CONFERENCE (NSS/MIC), 2013,
  • [36] Validation of scatter correction with Monte Carlo simulation for uEXPLORER
    He, Liuchun
    Deng, Zilin
    Ding, Yu
    Zhao, Yong
    Hu, Debin
    Dong, Yun
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2019, 60
  • [37] A note on meta-analysis of diagnostic test studies - Reply
    Kittler, H
    ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY, 2004, 140 (03) : 364 - 365
  • [38] Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy in neurosurgical practice
    Dubourg, Julie
    Berhouma, Moncef
    Cotton, Michael
    Messerer, Mahmoud
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2012, 33 (01)
  • [39] Implications of empirical Bayes meta-analysis for test validation
    Brannick, MT
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2001, 86 (03) : 468 - 480
  • [40] Monte Carlo studies of bootstrap variability in ROC analysis with data dependency
    Wu, Jin Chu
    Martin, Alvin F.
    Kacker, Raghu N.
    COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS-SIMULATION AND COMPUTATION, 2019, 48 (02) : 317 - 333