Cargando…

Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches

BACKGROUND: Logistic regression is a statistical model widely used in cross-sectional and cohort studies to identify and quantify the effects of potential disease risk factors. However, the impact of imperfect tests on adjusted odds ratios (and thus on the identification of risk factors) is under-ap...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Valle, Denis, Lima, Joanna M. Tucker, Millar, Justin, Amratia, Punam, Haque, Ubydul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26537373
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0966-y
_version_ 1782399405866876928
author Valle, Denis
Lima, Joanna M. Tucker
Millar, Justin
Amratia, Punam
Haque, Ubydul
author_facet Valle, Denis
Lima, Joanna M. Tucker
Millar, Justin
Amratia, Punam
Haque, Ubydul
author_sort Valle, Denis
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Logistic regression is a statistical model widely used in cross-sectional and cohort studies to identify and quantify the effects of potential disease risk factors. However, the impact of imperfect tests on adjusted odds ratios (and thus on the identification of risk factors) is under-appreciated. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to the problem associated with modelling imperfect diagnostic tests, and propose simple Bayesian models to adequately address this issue. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to determine the proportion of malaria studies that appropriately accounted for false-negatives/false-positives in a logistic regression setting. Inference from the standard logistic regression was also compared with that from three proposed Bayesian models using simulations and malaria data from the western Brazilian Amazon. RESULTS: A systematic literature review suggests that malaria epidemiologists are largely unaware of the problem of using logistic regression to model imperfect diagnostic test results. Simulation results reveal that statistical inference can be substantially improved when using the proposed Bayesian models versus the standard logistic regression. Finally, analysis of original malaria data with one of the proposed Bayesian models reveals that microscopy sensitivity is strongly influenced by how long people have lived in the study region, and an important risk factor (i.e., participation in forest extractivism) is identified that would have been missed by standard logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Given the numerous diagnostic methods employed by malaria researchers and the ubiquitous use of logistic regression to model the results of these diagnostic tests, this paper provides critical guidelines to improve data analysis practice in the presence of misclassification error. Easy-to-use code that can be readily adapted to WinBUGS is provided, enabling straightforward implementation of the proposed Bayesian models. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-015-0966-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4634725
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46347252015-11-06 Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches Valle, Denis Lima, Joanna M. Tucker Millar, Justin Amratia, Punam Haque, Ubydul Malar J Methodology BACKGROUND: Logistic regression is a statistical model widely used in cross-sectional and cohort studies to identify and quantify the effects of potential disease risk factors. However, the impact of imperfect tests on adjusted odds ratios (and thus on the identification of risk factors) is under-appreciated. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to the problem associated with modelling imperfect diagnostic tests, and propose simple Bayesian models to adequately address this issue. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to determine the proportion of malaria studies that appropriately accounted for false-negatives/false-positives in a logistic regression setting. Inference from the standard logistic regression was also compared with that from three proposed Bayesian models using simulations and malaria data from the western Brazilian Amazon. RESULTS: A systematic literature review suggests that malaria epidemiologists are largely unaware of the problem of using logistic regression to model imperfect diagnostic test results. Simulation results reveal that statistical inference can be substantially improved when using the proposed Bayesian models versus the standard logistic regression. Finally, analysis of original malaria data with one of the proposed Bayesian models reveals that microscopy sensitivity is strongly influenced by how long people have lived in the study region, and an important risk factor (i.e., participation in forest extractivism) is identified that would have been missed by standard logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Given the numerous diagnostic methods employed by malaria researchers and the ubiquitous use of logistic regression to model the results of these diagnostic tests, this paper provides critical guidelines to improve data analysis practice in the presence of misclassification error. Easy-to-use code that can be readily adapted to WinBUGS is provided, enabling straightforward implementation of the proposed Bayesian models. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-015-0966-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4634725/ /pubmed/26537373 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0966-y Text en © Valle et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Methodology
Valle, Denis
Lima, Joanna M. Tucker
Millar, Justin
Amratia, Punam
Haque, Ubydul
Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
title Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
title_full Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
title_fullStr Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
title_full_unstemmed Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
title_short Bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
title_sort bias in logistic regression due to imperfect diagnostic test results and practical correction approaches
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26537373
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0966-y
work_keys_str_mv AT valledenis biasinlogisticregressionduetoimperfectdiagnostictestresultsandpracticalcorrectionapproaches
AT limajoannamtucker biasinlogisticregressionduetoimperfectdiagnostictestresultsandpracticalcorrectionapproaches
AT millarjustin biasinlogisticregressionduetoimperfectdiagnostictestresultsandpracticalcorrectionapproaches
AT amratiapunam biasinlogisticregressionduetoimperfectdiagnostictestresultsandpracticalcorrectionapproaches
AT haqueubydul biasinlogisticregressionduetoimperfectdiagnostictestresultsandpracticalcorrectionapproaches