A comparison of parametric and nonparametric approaches to ROC analysis of quantitative diagnostic tests

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 94-102

  Hajian Tilaki, Karim O ^a   Hanley, James A ^a,b   Joseph, Lawrence ^a,c   Collet, Jean Paul ^a,d  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

area under the curve (AUC); binormal model; comparison, parametric; LABROC; nonparametric procedure; quantitative diagnostic test; ROC analysis

Indexed keywords

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH ROUTE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEM ANALYSIS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REFERENCE VALUES; ROC CURVE;

EID: 0031024234     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9701700111     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Metz CE, Shen J-H, Benjamin AH. New methods for estimating a binormal ROC curve from continuously distributed test results. Annual meeting of the American Statistical Association, Anaheim, CA, 1990.
2. Hanley JA. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology: the state of the art. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging. 1989;29: 307-35.
3. Begg CB. Advances in statistical methodology for diagnostic medicine in the 1980's. Stat Med. 1991;10:1887-95.
4. Swets JA. ROC analysis applied to the evaluation of diagnostic techniques. Invest Radiol. 1979;14:109-21.
5. Metz CE. ROC methodology in radiologic imaging. Invest Radiol. 1986;21:720-33.
6. Swets JA. Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: implications for theory and measurement of performance. Psychol Bull. 1986;99:181-98.
7. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29-36.
8. Swets JA. Indices of discrimination or diagnostic accuracy: their ROCs and implied models. Psychol Bull. 1986;99:100-17.
9. Green DM, Swets JA. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1966.
10. Dorfman DD, Alf E. Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of signal detection theory and determination of confidence intervals - rating method data. J Math Psychol. 1969;6:487-96.
11. Linnet K. Comparison of quantitative diagnostic tests: type I error, power, and sample size. Stat Med. 1987;6:147-58.
12. Goddard MJ, Hinberg I. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and non-normal data: an empirical study. Stat Med. 1990;9:325-77.
13. Egan JP. Signal Detection Theory and ROC Analysis. New York, Academic Press, 1975.
14. Tosteson ANA, Begg CB. A general regression methodology for ROC curve estimation. Med Decis Making. 1988;8:207-15.
15. Hanley JA. The robustness of the "binormal" assumptions used in fitting ROC curves. Med Decis Making. 1988;8:197-203.
16. Metz CE. LABROC and ROCFIT software. Available from Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 1990.
17. Wieand S, Gail MH, James KH, James BR. A family of nonparametric statistics for comparing diagnostic markers with paired or unpaired data. Biometrika. 1989;76:585-92.
18. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837-45.
19. Bamber D. The area above the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating graph. J Math Psychol. 1975;12:387-415.
20. Centor RM, Schwartz J. An evaluation of methods for estimating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Med Decis Making. 1985;5:149-56.
21. Hanley JA. The use of the "binormal" model for parametric ROC analysis of quantitative diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 1996; 15:1575-85.
22. Obuchowski NA. Computing sample size for receiver operating characteristic studies. Invest Radiol. 1994;29:238-43.
23. Metz CE. Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological ROC studies. Invest Radiol. 1989; 24:234-45.
24. Rockette HE, Obuchowski NA, Gur D. Nonparametric estimation of degenerate ROC curve data sets used for comparison of imaging system. Invest Radiol. 1990;25:835-7.
25. Hajian-Tilaki KO, Hanley JA. The robustness of the binormal model for parametric ROC analysis of laboratory type data. Submitted for publication.
26. Conover WJ, Iman RL. The rank transformation as a method of discrimination with some examples. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods 1980;A9(5):465-87.
27. O'Gorman TW, Woolson RF. On the efficacy of the rank transformation in stepwise logistic and discriminant analysis. Stat Med. 1993;12:143-51.
28. Conover WJ, Iman RL. Rank transformations as a bridge between parametric and nonparametric statistics. Am Statistician. 1981;35:124-9.