ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2022
A family of estimators to diagnostic accuracy when candidate tests are subject to detection limits-Application to diagnosing early stage Alzheimer disease.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- 15 years of longitudinal genetic, clinical, cognitive, imaging, and biochemical measures in DIAN.NPJ dementia · 2026Article
- Estimating transformations for evaluating diagnostic tests with covariate adjustment.Statistical methods in medical research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In disease diagnosis, individuals are usually assumed to be one of the two basic types, healthy or diseased, as typically based on an established gold standard. Candidate markers for diagnosing a disease often are much cheaper and less invasive than the gold standard but must be evaluated against the gold standard for their sensitivity and specificity to accurately diagnose the disease. When candidate diagnostic markers are fully measured, receiver operating characteristic curves have been the standard approaches for assessing diagnostic accuracy. However, full measurements of diagnostic markers may not be available above or below certain limits due to various practical and technical limitations. For example, in the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, the Roche Elecsys® immunoassays have a measuring range for multiple cerebrospinal fluid molecular concentrations. Many cognitive tests used in diagnosing dementia due to Alzheimer disease are also subject to detection limits, often referred to as the floor and ceiling effects in the neuropsychological literature. We propose a new statistical methodology for estimating the diagnostic accuracy when a diagnostic marker is subject to detection limits by dividing the entire study sample into two sub-samples by a threshold of the diagnostic marker. We then propose a family of estimators to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve by combining a conditional nonparametric estimator and another conditional semi-parametric estimator derived from Cox's proportional hazards model. We derive the variance to the proposed estimators, and further, assess the performance of the proposed estimators as a function of possible thresholds through an extensive simulation study, and recommend the optimum thresholds. Finally, we apply the proposed methodology to assess the ability of several cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and cognitive tests in diagnosing early stage Alzheimer disease dementia.
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.