Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33021738›Full record

ArticleBiometrics2022

Robust methods to correct for measurement error when evaluating a surrogate marker.

Layla Parast, Tanya P Garcia, Ross L Prentice, Raymond J Carroll

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Layla ParastRAND Corporation, Statistics Group, Santa Monica, California.ORCID 0000-0002-7288-1009
Tanya P GarciaDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Ross L PrenticePublic Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Raymond J CarrollDepartment of Statistics, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-5465-9682

Funding

Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI Elizabeth T. Gershoff · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
Measurement Error, Nutrition, Physical Activity and CancerU01CA057030 · NCI · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI CARROLL, RAYMOND J. · 2015 to 2019
$2.8M
Robust Statistical Methods to Identify and Use Surrogate Markers in DiabetesR01DK118354 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI PARAST, LAYLA · 2018 to 2025
$2.0M
Innovative Statistical Models for Development of First Huntington's Disease Progression Risk Assessment ToolK01NS099343 · NINDS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI GARCIA, TANYA PAMELA · 2017 to 2019
$739k
Nutrition, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics Training GrantT32CA090301 · NCI · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI CARROLL, RAYMOND J. · 2016 to 2020
$712k
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA090301NCI NIH HHS U01 CA057030NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK118354NINDS NIH HHS K01 NS099343
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The identification of valid surrogate markers of disease or disease progression has the potential to decrease the length and costs of future studies. Most available methods that assess the value of a surrogate marker ignore the fact that surrogates are often measured with error. Failing to adjust for measurement error can erroneously identify a useful surrogate marker as not useful or vice versa. We investigate and propose robust methods to correct for the effect of measurement error when evaluating a surrogate marker using multiple estimators developed for parametric and nonparametric estimates of the proportion of treatment effect explained by the surrogate marker. In addition, we quantify the attenuation bias induced by measurement error and develop inference procedures to allow for variance and confidence interval estimation. Through a simulation study, we show that our proposed estimators correct for measurement error in the surrogate marker and that our inference procedures perform well in finite samples. We illustrate these methods by examining a potential surrogate marker that is measured with error, hemoglobin A1c, using data from the Diabetes Prevention Program clinical trial.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalResearch DesignBiasBiomarkersComputer SimulationBiomarkerskernel estimationmeasurement errornonparametricrobustsurrogate markertreatment effect

Identifiers

PMID33021738
PMCPMC8021594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.