ArticleMathematics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
A Flexible Method for Diagnostic Accuracy with Biomarker Measurement Error.
Article in Mathematics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biomarker data with measurement error in medical research: A literature review.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational statisticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diagnostic biomarkers are often measured with errors due to imperfect lab conditions or analytic variability of the assay. The ability of a diagnostic biomarker to discriminate between cases and controls is often measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, among others. Ignoring measurement error can cause biased estimation of a diagnostic accuracy measure, which results in misleading interpretation of the efficacy of a diagnostic biomarker. Existing assays available are either research grade or clinical grade. Research assays are cost effective, often multiplex, but they may be associated with moderate measurement errors leading to poorer diagnostic performance. In comparison, clinical assays may provide better diagnostic ability, but with higher cost since they are usually developed by industry. Correction for attenuation methods are often valid when biomarkers are from a normal distribution, but may be biased with skewed biomarkers. In this paper, we develop a flexible method based on skew-normal biomarker distributions to correct for bias in estimating diagnostic performance measures including AUC, sensitivity, and specificity. Finite sample performance of the proposed method is examined via extensive simulation studies. The methods are applied to a pancreatic cancer biomarker study.
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.