Verification bias on sensitivity and specificity measurements in diagnostic medicine: a comparison of some approaches used for correction

Verification bias may occur when the test results of not all subjects are verified by using a gold standard. The correction for this bias can be made using different approaches depending on whether missing gold standard test results are random or not. Some of these approaches with binary test and gold standard results include the correction method by Begg and Greenes, lower and upper limits for diagnostic measurements by Zhou, logistic regression method, multiple imputation method, and neural networks. In this study, all these approaches are compared by employing a real and simulated data under different conditions.

[1]  D. Rubin,et al.  Multiple Imputation for Interval Estimation from Simple Random Samples with Ignorable Nonresponse , 1986 .

[2]  Nathaniel Schenker,et al.  Asymptotic results for multiple imputation , 1988 .

[3]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Neural Networks , 1996 .

[4]  Manuela Buzoianu,et al.  Adjusting for verification bias in diagnostic test evaluation: A Bayesian approach , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  Dursun Delen,et al.  Predicting breast cancer survivability: a comparison of three data mining methods , 2005, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[6]  Huiman X Barnhart,et al.  Accounting for Nonignorable Verification Bias in Assessment of Diagnostic Tests , 2003, Biometrics.

[7]  K J M Janssen,et al.  Multiple imputation to correct for partial verification bias revisited , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  R A Greenes,et al.  Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subject to selection bias. , 1983, Biometrics.

[9]  A. Zwinderman,et al.  Correcting for partial verification bias: a comparison of methods. , 2011, Annals of epidemiology.

[10]  Nandini Dendukuri,et al.  Multiple imputation for correcting verification bias by Ofer Harel and Xiao‐Hua Zhou, Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:3769–3786 , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  Šarūnas Raudys,et al.  Statistical and Neural Classifiers: An Integrated Approach to Design , 2012 .

[12]  Gene A Pennello,et al.  Bayesian Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy When Disease State is Unverified for Some Subjects , 2011, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[13]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine , 2002 .

[14]  Brad Warner,et al.  Understanding Neural Networks as Statistical Tools , 1996 .

[15]  W. Vach,et al.  Neural networks and logistic regression: Part I , 1996 .

[16]  J. Yerushalmy.  Statistical problems in assessing methods of medical diagnosis, with special reference to X-ray techniques. , 1947, Public health reports.

[17]  D. Rubin.  Multiple Imputation After 18+ Years , 1996 .

[18]  Andrea Rotnitzky,et al.  Estimation of the ROC Curve under Verification Bias , 2009, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[19]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimators of sensitivity and specificity corrected for verification bias , 1993 .

[20]  Richard D. De Veaux,et al.  [Neural Networks in Applied Statistics]: Discussion , 1996 .

[21]  Lena Osterhagen,et al.  Multiple Imputation For Nonresponse In Surveys , 2016 .

[22]  Ofer Harel,et al.  Multiple imputation for correcting verification bias , 2006, Statistics in medicine.

[23]  Jorge Alberto Achcar,et al.  Estimators of sensitivity and specificity in the presence of verification bias: A Bayesian approach , 2006, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[24]  A. Yapar,et al.  Preoperative evaluation of hyperparathyroidism: the role of dual-phase parathyroid scintigraphy and ultrasound imaging , 2008, Annals of nuclear medicine.

[25]  X H Zhou,et al.  Correcting for verification bias in studies of a diagnostic test's accuracy , 1998, Statistical methods in medical research.

[26]  S. van Buuren,et al.  Flexible mutlivariate imputation by MICE , 1999 .

[27]  David E. Booth,et al.  Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data , 2000, Technometrics.