Chance-corrected measures of the validity of a binary diagnostic test.

Chance-corrected measures of the validity of diagnostic tests can be a valuable supplement to traditional measures which do not take chance-agreement between diagnostic test and true disease status into account. Recently, several authors have propagated chance-corrected measures of sensitivity and specificity, the most commonly employed indices of validity of binary diagnostic tests. A major limitation of these measures is their dependence on disease prevalence. In this paper, we propose simple alternative chance-corrected measures of sensitivity and specificity which do not share this limitation. The chance-corrected measure of sensitivity can be expressed as 1--negative likelihood ratio, and the chance-corrected measure of specificity can be expressed as 1--inverse of the positive likelihood ratio. The properties of the proposed measures are described and graphically illustrated, and formulas are given for point and interval estimation of the measures.

[1]  O S Miettinen,et al.  Proportion of disease caused or prevented by a given exposure, trait or intervention. , 1974, American journal of epidemiology.

[2]  Levin Ml,et al.  The occurrence of lung cancer in man. , 1953, Acta - Unio Internationalis Contra Cancrum.

[3]  T. Koepsell,et al.  Measures of gain in certainty from a diagnostic test. , 1985, American journal of epidemiology.

[4]  Helena C. Kraemer,et al.  Assessment of 2 × 2 Associations: Generalization of Signal-Detection Methodology , 1988 .

[5]  J. Fleiss.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1974 .

[6]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[7]  H. Kraemer.  The Robustness of Common Measures of 2×2 Association to Bias Due to Misclassifications , 1985 .

[8]  H. Kraemer,et al.  Kappa coefficients in epidemiology: an appraisal of a reappraisal. , 1988, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[9]  W. Youden,et al.  Index for rating diagnostic tests , 1950, Cancer.

[10]  S P Azen,et al.  OBTAINING CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR THE RISK RATIO IN COHORT STUDIES , 1978 .

[11]  A. Feinstein,et al.  Clinical Epidemiology: The Architecture of Clinical Research. , 1987 .

[12]  J. R. Landis,et al.  A general caxedorical data memddology for evaluating medical diagnostic tests , 1982 .

[13]  D B Matchar,et al.  Likelihood ratios for continuous test results--making the clinicians' job easier or harder? , 1993, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[14]  A. Feinstein,et al.  High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. , 1990, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  L. Pickle,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity-like measures of the validity of a diagnostic test that are corrected for chance agreement. , 1992, Epidemiology.

[16]  J. Jamart.  Rejoinder: chance-corrected sensitivity and specificity for three-zone diagnostic tests. , 1993, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  D. Sackett,et al.  The Ends of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity , 1992, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[18]  J. Jamart.  Chance-corrected sensitivity and specificity for three-zone diagnostic tests. , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[19]  B. Macmahon,et al.  Attributable risk percent in case-control studies. , 1971, British journal of preventive & social medicine.

[20]  H. Kraemer,et al.  2 x 2 kappa coefficients: measures of agreement or association. , 1989, Biometrics.

[21]  A R Feinstein,et al.  The inadequacy of binary models for the clinical reality of three-zone diagnostic decisions. , 1990, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

[22]  Lloyd D. Fisher,et al.  Exercise stress testing. Correlations among history of angina, ST-segment response and prevalence of coronary-artery disease in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS). , 1979, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  J. Fleiss.  Measuring agreement between two judges on the presence or absence of a trait. , 1975, Biometrics.

[24]  H. Kraemer.  Ramifications of a population model forκ as a coefficient of reliability , 1979 .

[25]  S D Walter,et al.  A reappraisal of the kappa coefficient. , 1988, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  N. Andreasen,et al.  Reliability studies of psychiatric diagnosis. Theory and practice. , 1981, Archives of general psychiatry.

[27]  D. Matchar,et al.  Diagnostic tests are not always black or white: or, all that glitters is not [a] gold [standard]. , 1991, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[28]  G. Diamond.  Clinical epistemology of sensitivity and specificity. , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[29]  W. Willett,et al.  Misinterpretation and misuse of the kappa statistic. , 1987, American journal of epidemiology.

[30]  S. Drance,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic test determined by repeated observations in the absence of an external standard. , 1991, Journal of clinical epidemiology.