A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 11 May 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Biostatistics
- Vol. 8 (2) , 239-251
- https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004
Abstract
Studies of diagnostic accuracy require more sophisticated methods for their meta-analysis than studies of therapeutic interventions. A number of different, and apparently divergent, methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies have been proposed, including two alternative approaches that are statistically rigorous and allow for between-study variability: the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) model (Rutter and Gatsonis, 2001) and bivariate random-effects meta-analysis (van Houwelingen and others, 1993), (van Houwelingen and others, 2002), (Reitsma and others, 2005). We show that these two models are very closely related, and define the circumstances in which they are identical. We discuss the different forms of summary model output suggested by the two approaches, including summary ROC curves, summary points, confidence regions, and prediction regions.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evidence based diagnosticsBMJ, 2005
- Graphing Confidence Ellipses: An Update of Ellip for Stata 8The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata, 2004
- Meta‐analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Assessment Studies with Varying Number of ThresholdsBiometrics, 2003
- Systematic reviews with individual patient data meta-analysis to evaluate diagnostic testsEuropean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 2003
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiativeBMJ, 2003
- Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelinesBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2002
- Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic testsStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening testsBMJ, 2001
- Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic TestsJAMA, 1999
- Confidence, Prediction, and Tolerance Regions for the Multivariate Normal DistributionJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1966