SynthesisSystematic reviews2015
Meta-analysis of test accuracy studies: an exploratory method for investigating the impact of missing thresholds.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Biochemical tests of placental function versus ultrasound assessment of fetal size for stillbirth and small-for-gestational-age infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Interleukin Dynamics and Their Correlation with Tumor Aggressiveness in Colorectal Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- The Effects of Early Bispectral Index to Predict Poor Neurological Function in Cardiac Arrest Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Quantifying how diagnostic test accuracy depends on threshold in a meta-analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2019Article
- Meta-analysis of test accuracy studies using imputation for partial reporting of multiple thresholds.Research synthesis methods · 2018Article
- The clinical utility of circulating tumour cells in patients with small cell lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2017Review
- Selective Cutoff Reporting in Studies of Diagnostic Test Accuracy: A Comparison of Conventional and Individual-Patient-Data Meta-Analyses of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Depression Screening Tool.American journal of epidemiology · 2017Article
- How can we define and analyse drug exposure more precisely to improve the prediction of hospitalizations in longitudinal (claims) data?European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
- Modelling multiple thresholds in meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies in mental health.Evidence-based mental health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrimary studies examining the accuracy of a continuous test evaluate its sensitivity and specificity at one or more thresholds. Meta-analysts then usually perform a separate meta-analysis for each threshold. However, the number of studies available for each threshold is often very different, as primary studies are inconsistent in the thresholds reported. Furthermore, of concern is selective reporting bias, because primary studies may be less likely to report a threshold when it gives low sensitivity and/or specificity estimates. This may lead to biased meta-analysis results. We developed an exploratory method to examine the potential impact of missing thresholds on conclusions from a test accuracy meta-analysis.
methodsOur method identifies studies that contain missing thresholds bounded between a pair of higher and lower thresholds for which results are available. The bounded missing threshold results (two-by-two tables) are then imputed, by assuming a linear relationship between threshold value and each of logit-sensitivity and logit-specificity. The imputed results are then added to the meta-analysis, to ascertain if original conclusions are robust. The method is evaluated through simulation, and application made to 13 studies evaluating protein:creatinine ratio (PCR) for detecting proteinuria in pregnancy with 23 different thresholds, ranging from one to seven per study.
resultsThe simulation shows the imputation method leads to meta-analysis estimates with smaller mean-square error. In the PCR application, it provides 50 additional results for meta-analysis and their inclusion produces lower test accuracy results than originally identified. For example, at a PCR threshold of 0.16, the summary specificity is 0.80 when using the original data, but 0.66 when also including the imputed data. At a PCR threshold of 0.25, the summary sensitivity is reduced from 0.95 to 0.85 when additionally including the imputed data.
conclusionsThe imputation method is a practical tool for researchers (often non-statisticians) to explore the potential impact of missing threshold results on their meta-analysis conclusions. Software is available to implement the method. In the PCR example, it revealed threshold results are vulnerable to the missing data, and so stimulates the need for advanced statistical models or, preferably, individual patient data from primary studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.