Cargando…

Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data

We aimed to compare the performance of three different individual ROC methods (one from each of the broad categories of parametric, nonparametric and semiparametric analysis) for assessing continuous diagnostic tests: the binormal method as a parametric method, an empirical approach as a nonparametr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Colak, Ertugrul, Mutlu, Fezan, Bal, Cengiz, Oner, Setenay, Ozdamar, Kazim, Gok, Bulent, Cavusoglu, Yuksel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3395260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22844346
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/698320
_version_ 1782237959465992192
author Colak, Ertugrul
Mutlu, Fezan
Bal, Cengiz
Oner, Setenay
Ozdamar, Kazim
Gok, Bulent
Cavusoglu, Yuksel
author_facet Colak, Ertugrul
Mutlu, Fezan
Bal, Cengiz
Oner, Setenay
Ozdamar, Kazim
Gok, Bulent
Cavusoglu, Yuksel
author_sort Colak, Ertugrul
collection PubMed
description We aimed to compare the performance of three different individual ROC methods (one from each of the broad categories of parametric, nonparametric and semiparametric analysis) for assessing continuous diagnostic tests: the binormal method as a parametric method, an empirical approach as a nonparametric method, and a semiparametric method using generalized linear models (GLM). We performed a simulation study with various sample sizes under normal, skewed, and monotone distributions. In the simulations, we used estimates of the ROC curve parameters a and b, estimates of the area under the curve (AUC), the standard errors and root mean square errors (RMSEs) of these estimates, and the 95% AUC confidence intervals for comparison. The three methodologies were also applied to an acute coronary syndrome dataset in which serum myoglobin levels were used as a biomarker for detecting acute coronary syndrome. The simulation and application studies suggest that the semiparametric ROC analysis using GLM is a reliable method when the distributions of the diagnostic test results are skewed and that it provides a smooth ROC curve for obtaining a unique cutoff value. A sample size of 50 is sufficient for applying the semiparametric ROC method.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3395260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33952602012-07-27 Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data Colak, Ertugrul Mutlu, Fezan Bal, Cengiz Oner, Setenay Ozdamar, Kazim Gok, Bulent Cavusoglu, Yuksel Comput Math Methods Med Research Article We aimed to compare the performance of three different individual ROC methods (one from each of the broad categories of parametric, nonparametric and semiparametric analysis) for assessing continuous diagnostic tests: the binormal method as a parametric method, an empirical approach as a nonparametric method, and a semiparametric method using generalized linear models (GLM). We performed a simulation study with various sample sizes under normal, skewed, and monotone distributions. In the simulations, we used estimates of the ROC curve parameters a and b, estimates of the area under the curve (AUC), the standard errors and root mean square errors (RMSEs) of these estimates, and the 95% AUC confidence intervals for comparison. The three methodologies were also applied to an acute coronary syndrome dataset in which serum myoglobin levels were used as a biomarker for detecting acute coronary syndrome. The simulation and application studies suggest that the semiparametric ROC analysis using GLM is a reliable method when the distributions of the diagnostic test results are skewed and that it provides a smooth ROC curve for obtaining a unique cutoff value. A sample size of 50 is sufficient for applying the semiparametric ROC method. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012 2012-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3395260/ /pubmed/22844346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/698320 Text en Copyright © 2012 Ertugrul Colak et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Colak, Ertugrul
Mutlu, Fezan
Bal, Cengiz
Oner, Setenay
Ozdamar, Kazim
Gok, Bulent
Cavusoglu, Yuksel
Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data
title Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data
title_full Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data
title_fullStr Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data
title_short Comparison of Semiparametric, Parametric, and Nonparametric ROC Analysis for Continuous Diagnostic Tests Using a Simulation Study and Acute Coronary Syndrome Data
title_sort comparison of semiparametric, parametric, and nonparametric roc analysis for continuous diagnostic tests using a simulation study and acute coronary syndrome data
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3395260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22844346
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/698320
work_keys_str_mv AT colakertugrul comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata
AT mutlufezan comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata
AT balcengiz comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata
AT onersetenay comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata
AT ozdamarkazim comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata
AT gokbulent comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata
AT cavusogluyuksel comparisonofsemiparametricparametricandnonparametricrocanalysisforcontinuousdiagnostictestsusingasimulationstudyandacutecoronarysyndromedata