Cargando…

A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies

BACKGROUND: A recent paper proposed an intent-to-diagnose approach to handle non-evaluable index test results and discussed several alternative approaches, with an application to the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography diagnostic accuracy studies. However, no simulation studies have been conduc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ma, Xiaoye, K Suri, Muhammad Fareed, Chu, Haitao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4280699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25475705
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-128
_version_ 1782350881234092032
author Ma, Xiaoye
K Suri, Muhammad Fareed
Chu, Haitao
author_facet Ma, Xiaoye
K Suri, Muhammad Fareed
Chu, Haitao
author_sort Ma, Xiaoye
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A recent paper proposed an intent-to-diagnose approach to handle non-evaluable index test results and discussed several alternative approaches, with an application to the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography diagnostic accuracy studies. However, no simulation studies have been conducted to test the performance of the methods. METHODS: We propose an extended trivariate generalized linear mixed model (TGLMM) to handle non-evaluable index test results. The performance of the intent-to-diagnose approach, the alternative approaches and the extended TGLMM approach is examined by extensive simulation studies. The meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography diagnostic accuracy studies is re-evaluated by the extended TGLMM. RESULTS: Simulation studies showed that the intent-to-diagnose approach under-estimate sensitivity and specificity. Under the missing at random (MAR) assumption, the TGLMM gives nearly unbiased estimates of test accuracy indices and disease prevalence. After applying the TGLMM approach to re-evaluate the coronary CT angiography meta-analysis, overall median sensitivity is 0.98 (0.967, 0.993), specificity is 0.875 (0.827, 0.923) and disease prevalence is 0.478 (0.379, 0.577). CONCLUSIONS: Under MAR assumption, the intent-to-diagnose approach under-estimate both sensitivity and specificity, while the extended TGLMM gives nearly unbiased estimates of sensitivity, specificity and prevalence. We recommend the extended TGLMM to handle non-evaluable index test subjects.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4280699
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42806992015-01-01 A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies Ma, Xiaoye K Suri, Muhammad Fareed Chu, Haitao BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: A recent paper proposed an intent-to-diagnose approach to handle non-evaluable index test results and discussed several alternative approaches, with an application to the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography diagnostic accuracy studies. However, no simulation studies have been conducted to test the performance of the methods. METHODS: We propose an extended trivariate generalized linear mixed model (TGLMM) to handle non-evaluable index test results. The performance of the intent-to-diagnose approach, the alternative approaches and the extended TGLMM approach is examined by extensive simulation studies. The meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography diagnostic accuracy studies is re-evaluated by the extended TGLMM. RESULTS: Simulation studies showed that the intent-to-diagnose approach under-estimate sensitivity and specificity. Under the missing at random (MAR) assumption, the TGLMM gives nearly unbiased estimates of test accuracy indices and disease prevalence. After applying the TGLMM approach to re-evaluate the coronary CT angiography meta-analysis, overall median sensitivity is 0.98 (0.967, 0.993), specificity is 0.875 (0.827, 0.923) and disease prevalence is 0.478 (0.379, 0.577). CONCLUSIONS: Under MAR assumption, the intent-to-diagnose approach under-estimate both sensitivity and specificity, while the extended TGLMM gives nearly unbiased estimates of sensitivity, specificity and prevalence. We recommend the extended TGLMM to handle non-evaluable index test subjects. BioMed Central 2014-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4280699/ /pubmed/25475705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-128 Text en © Ma et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ma, Xiaoye
K Suri, Muhammad Fareed
Chu, Haitao
A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies
title A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies
title_full A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies
title_fullStr A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies
title_full_unstemmed A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies
title_short A trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary CT angiography studies
title_sort trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic studies accounting for prevalence and non-evaluable subjects: re-evaluation of the meta-analysis of coronary ct angiography studies
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4280699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25475705
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-128
work_keys_str_mv AT maxiaoye atrivariatemetaanalysisofdiagnosticstudiesaccountingforprevalenceandnonevaluablesubjectsreevaluationofthemetaanalysisofcoronaryctangiographystudies
AT ksurimuhammadfareed atrivariatemetaanalysisofdiagnosticstudiesaccountingforprevalenceandnonevaluablesubjectsreevaluationofthemetaanalysisofcoronaryctangiographystudies
AT chuhaitao atrivariatemetaanalysisofdiagnosticstudiesaccountingforprevalenceandnonevaluablesubjectsreevaluationofthemetaanalysisofcoronaryctangiographystudies
AT maxiaoye trivariatemetaanalysisofdiagnosticstudiesaccountingforprevalenceandnonevaluablesubjectsreevaluationofthemetaanalysisofcoronaryctangiographystudies
AT ksurimuhammadfareed trivariatemetaanalysisofdiagnosticstudiesaccountingforprevalenceandnonevaluablesubjectsreevaluationofthemetaanalysisofcoronaryctangiographystudies
AT chuhaitao trivariatemetaanalysisofdiagnosticstudiesaccountingforprevalenceandnonevaluablesubjectsreevaluationofthemetaanalysisofcoronaryctangiographystudies