PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10803614

Components-of-variance models and multiple-bootstrap experiments: an alternative method for random-effects, receiver operating characteristic analysis.

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to develop an alternative approach to random-effects, receiver operating characteristic analysis inspired by a general formulation of components-of-variance models. The alternative approach is a higher-order generalization of the Dorfman, Berbaum, and Metz (DBM) approach that yields additional information on the variance structure of the problem. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six population experiments were designed to determine the six variance components in the DBM model. For practical problems, in which only a finite set of readers and patients are available, six analogous bootstrap experiments may be substituted for the population experiments to estimate the variance components. Monte Carlo simulations were performed on the population experiments, and those results were compared with the corresponding multiple-bootstrap estimates and those obtained with the DBM approach. Confidence intervals on the difference of ROC parameters for competing diagnostic modalities were estimated, and corresponding comparisons were made. RESULTS: For mean values, the agreement of present estimates of variance structures with population results was excellent and, when suitably weighted and mixed, similar to or closer than that with the DBM method. For many variance structures, the confidence intervals in this study for the difference in ROC area between modalities were comparable to those with the DBM method. When reader variability was large, however, mean confidence intervals from this study were tighter than those with the DBM method and closer to population results. CONCLUSION: The jackknife approach of DBM provides a linear approximation to receiver-operating-characteristic statistics that are intrinsically nonlinear. The multiple-bootstrap technique of this study, however, provides a more general, nonparametric, maximum-likelihood approach. It also yields estimates of the variance structure previously unavailable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S V Beiden, R F Wagner, G Campbell. 2000. Components-of-variance models and multiple-bootstrap experiments: an alternative method for random-effects, receiver operating characteristic analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1076-6332(00)80008-2

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Covariates-dependent confidence intervals for the difference or ratio of two median survival times.

In this paper, we are concerned with the estimation of the discrepancy between two treatments when right-censored survival data are accompanied with covariates. Conditional confidence intervals given the available covariates are constructed for the difference between or ratio of two median survival times under the unstratified and stratified Cox proportional hazards models, respectively. The proposed confidence intervals provide the information about the difference in survivorship for patients with common covariates but in different treatments. The results of a simulation study investigation of the coverage probability and expected length of the confidence intervals suggest the one designed for the stratified Cox model when data fit reasonably with the model. When the stratified Cox model is not feasible, however, the one designed for the unstratified Cox model is recommended. The use of the confidence intervals is finally illustrated with a HIV+ data set.

Confidence Intervals↗

Inferences on standardized mean difference: the generalized variable approach.

The standardized mean difference has been widely used as the most common index of effect magnitude in many applied fields. In this paper, we propose a novel approach using the concept of generalized variable for the confidence interval estimation and hypothesis testing of standardized mean difference. Furthermore, we extend this approach to compare standardized mean differences between two studies or between two strata. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed approach can provide confidence intervals with excellent coverage properties and can perform hypothesis testing with satisfactory type-I error control.

Confidence Intervals↗

Interval estimation for rank correlation coefficients based on the probit transformation with extension to measurement error correction of correlated ranked data.

The Spearman (rho(s)) and Kendall (tau) rank correlation coefficient are routinely used as measures of association between non-normally distributed random variables. However, confidence limits for rho(s) are only available under the assumption of bivariate normality and for tau under the assumption of asymptotic normality of tau. In this paper, we introduce another approach for obtaining confidence limits for rho(s) or tau based on the arcsin transformation of sample probit score correlations. This approach is shown to be applicable for an arbitrary bivariate distribution. The arcsin-based estimators for rho(s) and tau (denoted by rho(s,a), tau(a)) are shown to have asymptotic relative efficiency (ARE) of 9/pi2 compared with the usual estimators rho(s) and tau when rho(s) and tau are, respectively, 0. In some nutritional applications, the Spearman rank correlation between nutrient intake as assessed by a reference instrument versus nutrient intake as assessed by a surrogate instrument is used as a measure of validity of the surrogate instrument. However, if only a single replicate (or a few replicates) are available for the reference instrument, then the estimated Spearman rank correlation will be downwardly biased due to measurement error. In this paper, we use the probit transformation as a tool for specifying an ANOVA-type model for replicate ranked data resulting in a point and interval estimate of a measurement error corrected rank correlation. This extends previous work by Rosner and Willett for obtaining point and interval estimates of measurement error corrected Pearson correlations.

Confidence Intervals↗