Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26537373›Full record

SynthesisMalaria journal2015

Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches.

Denis Valle, Joanna M Tucker Lima, Justin Millar, Punam Amratia, Ubydul Haque

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Malaria journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Denis ValleSchool of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. drvalle@ufl.edu.
Joanna M Tucker LimaSchool of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. jmtucker@ufl.edu.
Justin MillarSchool of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. justinjmillar@gmail.com.
Punam AmratiaSchool of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. punam.amratia@ufl.edu.
Ubydul HaqueEmerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. ubydulhaque@ufl.edu.
University of Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLogistic regression is a statistical model widely used in cross-sectional and cohort studies to identify and quantify the effects of potential disease risk factors. However, the impact of imperfect tests on adjusted odds ratios (and thus on the identification of risk factors) is under-appreciated. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to the problem associated with modelling imperfect diagnostic tests, and propose simple Bayesian models to adequately address this issue.

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted to determine the proportion of malaria studies that appropriately accounted for false-negatives/false-positives in a logistic regression setting. Inference from the standard logistic regression was also compared with that from three proposed Bayesian models using simulations and malaria data from the western Brazilian Amazon.

resultsA systematic literature review suggests that malaria epidemiologists are largely unaware of the problem of using logistic regression to model imperfect diagnostic test results. Simulation results reveal that statistical inference can be substantially improved when using the proposed Bayesian models versus the standard logistic regression. Finally, analysis of original malaria data with one of the proposed Bayesian models reveals that microscopy sensitivity is strongly influenced by how long people have lived in the study region, and an important risk factor (i.e., participation in forest extractivism) is identified that would have been missed by standard logistic regression.

conclusionGiven the numerous diagnostic methods employed by malaria researchers and the ubiquitous use of logistic regression to model the results of these diagnostic tests, this paper provides critical guidelines to improve data analysis practice in the presence of misclassification error. Easy-to-use code that can be readily adapted to WinBUGS is provided, enabling straightforward implementation of the proposed Bayesian models.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ErrorsStatistics as TopicBrazilDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMalaria

Identifiers

PMID26537373
PMCPMC4634725
OpenAlexW2124430564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.