Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40485332›Full record

ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2025

A Bivariate Finite Mixture Random Effects Model for Identifying and Accommodating Outliers in Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-Analyses.

Zelalem F Negeri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Zelalem F NegeriDepartment of Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2024-04652
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Outlying studies are prevalent in meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies and may lead to misleading inferences and decision-making unless their negative effect is appropriately dealt with. Statistical methods for detecting and down-weighting the impact of such studies have recently gained the attention of many researchers. However, these methods dichotomize each study in the meta-analysis as outlying or non-outlying and focus on examining the effect of outlying studies on the summary sensitivity and specificity only. We developed and evaluated a robust and flexible random-effects bivariate finite mixture model for meta-analyzing diagnostic test accuracy studies. The proposed model accounts for both the within- and across-study heterogeneity in diagnostic test results, generates the probability that each study in a meta-analysis is outlying instead of dichotomizing the status of the studies, and allows assessing the impact of outlying studies on the pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, and between-study heterogeneity. Our simulation study and real-life data examples demonstrated that the proposed model was robust to the existence of outlying studies, produced precise point and interval estimates of the pooled sensitivity and specificity, and yielded similar results to the standard models when there were no outliers. Extensive simulations demonstrated relatively better bias and confidence interval width, but comparable root mean squared error and lesser coverage probability of the proposed model. Practitioners can use our proposed model as a stand-alone model to conduct a meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies or as an alternative sensitivity analysis model when outlying studies are present in a meta-analysis.

Indexed as

BiometryDiagnostic Tests, RoutineMeta-Analysis as TopicModels, StatisticalHumansSensitivity and Specificitybivariate finite mixture modeldiagnostic test accuracymeta‐analysisoutlier detection and accommodationsensitivity and specificity

Identifiers

PMID40485332
PMCPMC12146828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.