Measurement Error and Confidence Intervals for ROC Curves

Measurement error in a continuous test variable may bias estimates of the summary properties of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. Typically, unbiased measurement error will reduce the diagnostic potential of a continuous test variable. This paper explores the effects of possibly heterogenous measurement error on estimated ROC curves for binormal test variables. Corrected estimators for specific points on the curve are derived under the assumption of known or estimated measurement variances for individual test results. These estimators and associated confidence intervals do not depend on normal assumptions for the distribution of the measurement error and are shown to be approximately unbiased for moderate size samples in a simulation study. An application from a study of emerging imaging modalities in breast cancer is used to demonstrate the new techniques. (© 2005 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

[1]  K. Paulsen,et al.  Analysis of the microvasculature and tissue type ratios in normal vs. benign and malignant breast tissue. , 2004, Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology.

[2]  B Reiser,et al.  Statistical inference for the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in the presence of random measurement error. , 2001, American journal of epidemiology.

[3]  B Reiser,et al.  Measuring the effectiveness of diagnostic markers in the presence of measurement error through the use of ROC curves. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  D Faraggi,et al.  The effect of random measurement error on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  K. Zou,et al.  Smooth non-parametric receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for continuous diagnostic tests. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  M. Coffin,et al.  Receiver operating characteristic studies and measurement errors. , 1997, Biometrics.

[7]  B J Biggerstaff,et al.  Incorporating variability in estimates of heterogeneity in the random effects model in meta-analysis. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  G. Campbell,et al.  Advances in statistical methodology for the evaluation of diagnostic and laboratory tests. , 1994, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  C. Begg,et al.  Advances in statistical methodology for diagnostic medicine in the 1980's. , 1991, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  N. Laird,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials. , 1986, Controlled clinical trials.