Bias in trials comparing paired continuous tests can cause researchers to choose the wrong screening modality

نویسندگان

  • Deborah H Glueck
  • Molly M Lamb
  • Colin I O'Donnell
  • Brandy M Ringham
  • John T Brinton
  • Keith E Muller
  • John M Lewin
  • Todd A Alonzo
  • Etta D Pisano
چکیده

BACKGROUND To compare the diagnostic accuracy of two continuous screening tests, a common approach is to test the difference between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. After study participants are screened with both screening tests, the disease status is determined as accurately as possible, either by an invasive, sensitive and specific secondary test, or by a less invasive, but less sensitive approach. For most participants, disease status is approximated through the less sensitive approach. The invasive test must be limited to the fraction of the participants whose results on either or both screening tests exceed a threshold of suspicion, or who develop signs and symptoms of the disease after the initial screening tests. The limitations of this study design lead to a bias in the ROC curves we call paired screening trial bias. This bias reflects the synergistic effects of inappropriate reference standard bias, differential verification bias, and partial verification bias. The absence of a gold reference standard leads to inappropriate reference standard bias. When different reference standards are used to ascertain disease status, it creates differential verification bias. When only suspicious screening test scores trigger a sensitive and specific secondary test, the result is a form of partial verification bias. METHODS For paired screening tests with bivariate normally distributed scores, we give formulae and programs to quantify the effect of paired screening trial bias on a paired comparison of area under the curves. We fix the prevalence of disease, and the chance a diseased subject manifests signs and symptoms. We derive the formulas for true sensitivity and specificity, and those for the sensitivity and specificity observed by the study investigator. RESULTS The observed area under the ROC curves is quite different from the true area under the ROC curves. The typical direction of the bias is a strong inflation in sensitivity, paired with a concomitant slight deflation of specificity. CONCLUSION In paired trials of screening tests, when area under the ROC curve is used as the metric, bias may lead researchers to make the wrong decision as to which screening test is better.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Reducing decision errors in the paired comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests with Gaussian outcomes

BACKGROUND Scientists often use a paired comparison of the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves to decide which continuous cancer screening test has the best diagnostic accuracy. In the paired design, all participants are screened with both tests. Participants with suspicious results or signs and symptoms of disease receive the reference standard test. The remaining particip...

متن کامل

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Safety of Dapagliflozin in Type 1 Diabetes Patients

Background and Purpose: The dapagliflozin’s safety profile in insulin-treated adult type-1 diabetes mellites (T1DM) patients remains poorly explored. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared the risk of all-cause side effects, study discontinuation of participants due to side effects, urinary tract infection (UTI), diabetic ketoacidosis, and hypoglycemia between dapagliflozi...

متن کامل

Blindness in Randomized Controlled Trials

In combination with randomization, blinding or masking is an important factor in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), particularly in trials that assess therapeutic effects. Here an attempt is made to explain blindness and why it is important. In clinical trials, blinding is defined as the condition imposed on a study in which study participants, health care providers and assessors collecting o...

متن کامل

تصادفی سازی در مطالعات کارآزمایی بالینی: از تئوری تا عمل

Background & Aim: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are studies which are able to provide the most valid evidence to compare various interventions in health research. Biases can affect the quality of research and ultimately make the results of a study invalid. One of the most important biases is selection bias. The best way to reduce selection bias is the use of random allocation. The aim of th...

متن کامل

Effect of Medicinal plant of roses on sexual dysfunction of female and male subjects: A systematic review of clinical trials

Background & Aim: Sexual dysfunction is the most common psychiatric disorder in the general population. The high cost and side effects of present treatments have prompted researchers to search for other therapeutic options. The aim of this study was to evaluate and summarize the results of trials on the effects of roses on sexual dysfunction through a systematic review. Methods: In this study,...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 9  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2009