PubMed · 15176409
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Kelly Morris. 2004. Mind moves onscreen: brain-computer interface comes to trial.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(04)00787-2
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
An important measure for comparison of accuracy between two diagnostic procedures is the difference in paired areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Non-parametric and maximum likelihood methods have been proposed for interval estimation for the difference in paired areas under ROC curves. However, these two methods are asymptotic procedures and their performance in finite sample sizes has not been thoroughly investigated. We propose to use the concept of generalized pivotal quantities (GPQs) to construct an exact confidence interval for the difference in paired areas under ROC curves. A simulation study is conducted to empirically investigate the probability coverage and expected length of the three methods for various combinations of sample sizes, values of the area under the ROC curve and correlations. Simulation results demonstrate that the exact confidence interval based on the concept of GPQs provides not only sufficient probability coverage but also reasonable expected length. Numerical examples using published data sets illustrate the proposed method.
A difference in an outcome variable between the treatment groups in a trial does not necessarily mean that there is a difference in the number of patients who experience relevant improvement on that variable. When the relevant improvement corresponds with an outcome or change in outcome that exceeds a certain threshold, the outcome variable can be dichotomized. A responder is a patient whose outcome exceeds the threshold. Comparisons can be made between the number of responders in the two treatment groups using logistic regression, or some other method to evaluate binary outcomes. An important disadvantage of this approach is the loss of power. In general, it is more efficient to test the difference between the mean values. We developed a statistical test that compares response rates for a dichotomized variable. It requires that an estimate of the reliability of the outcome variable is available. Simulations showed that the test was valid and robust over a wide range of distributions and sample sizes. The power was greater than the power of a chi(2) test, which would enable substantial reduction in the sample size.
Joint analysis of longitudinal measurements and survival data has received much attention in recent years. However, previous work has primarily focused on a single failure type for the event time. In this paper we consider joint modelling of repeated measurements and competing risks failure time data to allow for more than one distinct failure type in the survival endpoint which occurs frequently in clinical trials. Our model uses latent random variables and common covariates to link together the sub-models for the longitudinal measurements and competing risks failure time data, respectively. An EM-based algorithm is derived to obtain the parameter estimates, and a profile likelihood method is proposed to estimate their standard errors. Our method enables one to make joint inference on multiple outcomes which is often necessary in analyses of clinical trials. Furthermore, joint analysis has several advantages compared with separate analysis of either the longitudinal data or competing risks survival data. By modelling the event time, the analysis of longitudinal measurements is adjusted to allow for non-ignorable missing data due to informative dropout, which cannot be appropriately handled by the standard linear mixed effects models alone. In addition, the joint model utilizes information from both outcomes, and could be substantially more efficient than the separate analysis of the competing risk survival data as shown in our simulation study. The performance of our method is evaluated and compared with separate analyses using both simulated data and a clinical trial for the scleroderma lung disease.