Cargando…
Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data
PURPOSE: To describe and demonstrate appropriate statistical approaches for estimating sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for correlated eye data. METHODS: We described generalized estimating equations (GEE) and cluster bootstrap to account for in...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7500131/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32936302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.61.11.29 |
_version_ | 1783583805161865216 |
---|---|
author | Ying, Gui-Shuang Maguire, Maureen G. Glynn, Robert J. Rosner, Bernard |
author_facet | Ying, Gui-Shuang Maguire, Maureen G. Glynn, Robert J. Rosner, Bernard |
author_sort | Ying, Gui-Shuang |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To describe and demonstrate appropriate statistical approaches for estimating sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for correlated eye data. METHODS: We described generalized estimating equations (GEE) and cluster bootstrap to account for inter-eye correlation and applied them for analyzing the data from a clinical study of telemedicine for the detection of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). RESULTS: Among 100 infants (200 eyes) selected for analysis, 20 infants had referral-warranted ROP (RW-ROP) in both eyes and 9 infants with RW-ROP only in one eye based on clinical eye examination. In the per-eye analysis that included both eyes of an infant, the image evaluation for RW-ROP had sensitivity of 83.7% and specificity of 86.8%. The 95% CI's from the naïve approach that ignored the inter-eye correlation were narrower than those of the GEE approach and cluster bootstrap for both sensitivity (width of 95% CI: 22.4% vs. 23.2% vs. 23.9%) and specificity (11.4% vs. 12.5% vs. 11.6%). The 95% CIs for sensitivity and specificity calculated from left eyes and right eyes separately were wider (35.2% and 30.8% respectively for sensitivity, 25.4% and 17.3% respectively for specificity). CONCLUSIONS: When an ocular test is performed in both eyes of some or all of the study subjects, the statistical analyses are best performed at the eye-level and account for the inter-eye correlation by using either the GEE or cluster bootstrap. Ignoring the inter-eye correlation results in 95% CIs that are inappropriately narrow and analyzing data from two eyes separately are not efficient. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7500131 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75001312020-09-25 Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data Ying, Gui-Shuang Maguire, Maureen G. Glynn, Robert J. Rosner, Bernard Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Focus on Data PURPOSE: To describe and demonstrate appropriate statistical approaches for estimating sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for correlated eye data. METHODS: We described generalized estimating equations (GEE) and cluster bootstrap to account for inter-eye correlation and applied them for analyzing the data from a clinical study of telemedicine for the detection of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). RESULTS: Among 100 infants (200 eyes) selected for analysis, 20 infants had referral-warranted ROP (RW-ROP) in both eyes and 9 infants with RW-ROP only in one eye based on clinical eye examination. In the per-eye analysis that included both eyes of an infant, the image evaluation for RW-ROP had sensitivity of 83.7% and specificity of 86.8%. The 95% CI's from the naïve approach that ignored the inter-eye correlation were narrower than those of the GEE approach and cluster bootstrap for both sensitivity (width of 95% CI: 22.4% vs. 23.2% vs. 23.9%) and specificity (11.4% vs. 12.5% vs. 11.6%). The 95% CIs for sensitivity and specificity calculated from left eyes and right eyes separately were wider (35.2% and 30.8% respectively for sensitivity, 25.4% and 17.3% respectively for specificity). CONCLUSIONS: When an ocular test is performed in both eyes of some or all of the study subjects, the statistical analyses are best performed at the eye-level and account for the inter-eye correlation by using either the GEE or cluster bootstrap. Ignoring the inter-eye correlation results in 95% CIs that are inappropriately narrow and analyzing data from two eyes separately are not efficient. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2020-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7500131/ /pubmed/32936302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.61.11.29 Text en Copyright 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
spellingShingle | Focus on Data Ying, Gui-Shuang Maguire, Maureen G. Glynn, Robert J. Rosner, Bernard Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data |
title | Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data |
title_full | Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data |
title_fullStr | Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data |
title_full_unstemmed | Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data |
title_short | Calculating Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values for Correlated Eye Data |
title_sort | calculating sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for correlated eye data |
topic | Focus on Data |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7500131/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32936302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.61.11.29 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yingguishuang calculatingsensitivityspecificityandpredictivevaluesforcorrelatedeyedata AT maguiremaureeng calculatingsensitivityspecificityandpredictivevaluesforcorrelatedeyedata AT glynnrobertj calculatingsensitivityspecificityandpredictivevaluesforcorrelatedeyedata AT rosnerbernard calculatingsensitivityspecificityandpredictivevaluesforcorrelatedeyedata |