A decision-tree strategy for combining diagnostic tests for prediction

Biometrical Journal

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 235-250

  Chen, James J ^a   Kodell, Ralph L ^a  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR TOXICOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Classification; Decision tree; Negative predictivity; Positive predictivity

Indexed keywords

BIOASSAY; DIAGNOSIS; FORECASTING;

CARCINOGENICS; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS; MEDICAL SCREENING; NEGATIVE PREDICTIVITY; POSITIVE PREDICTIVITY; PREDICTIVE TEST; PREDICTIVITY; SHORT-TERM ASSAY; SHORT-TERM TEST;

DECISION TREES;

EID: 0033449121     PISSN: 03233847     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-4036(199905)41:2<235::AID-BIMJ235>3.0.CO;2-U     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. BAKER, S. G., 1955: Evaluating multiple diagnostic tests with partial verification. Biometrics 51, 330-337.
2. BEGG, C. B., 1991: Advances in statistical methodology for diagnostic medicine in the 1980's. Statistics in Medicine 10, 1887-1895.
3. BENIGNI, R., 1991: The ability of short-term tests to predict carcinogenicity can be summarized in a single index. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 34, 27-37.
4. DIMAGNO, E. P., MALAGELADA, J. R., TAYLOR, W. F., and GO, V. L., 1977: A prospective comparison of current diagnostic tests for pancreatic cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 297, 737-742.
5. DREWS, C. D., FLANDERS, W. D., and KOSINSKI, A. S., 1993: Use of two data sources to estimate odds ratios in case-control studies. Epidemiology 4, 327-335.
6. Environmental Protection Agency, 1968: Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Federal Register 51, 33992-34003.
7. Food and Drug Administration, 1994: International Conference on Harmonisation: Stability Testing of New Drugs Substances and Products; Guideline; Availability; Notice. Federal Register 59, 48754-48759.
8. HUI, S. L. and WALDER, S. D., 1980: Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. Biometrics 36, 167-171.
9. JELOVSEK, F. R., MATTISON, D. R., and CHEN, J. J., 1989: Prediction of risk for human developmental toxicity: how important are animal studies. American Journal of Obstetrics tind Gynecology 74, 624-636.
10. KATZ, D. and FOXMAN, B., 1993: How well do prediction equation predict? Using receiver operating characteristic curves and accuracy curves to compare validity and generalizability. Epidemiology 4, 319-326.
11. KODELL, R. L., CHEN, J. J., JACKSON, C. D., and GAYLOR, D. W., 1998: Using short-term tests to predict carcinogenic activity in the long-term bioassay. Human & Ecological Risk Assessment, 1999 (to appear).
12. NAGELKERKE, N. J. D., FIDLER, V., and BUWALDA, M., 1988: Instrumental variables in the evaluation of diagnostic test procedures when the true disease state is unknown. Statistics in Medicine 7, 739-744.
13. SCHARDEIN, J. L., SCHWETZ, B. A., and KENEL, M. F., 1985: Species sensitivities and prediction of teratogenic potential. Environmental Health Perspectives 61, 55-67.
14. SWETS, J. A., 1988: Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240, 1285-1293.
15. TENNANT, R. W., MARGOLIN, B. H., SHELBY, M. D., ZEIGER, E., HASEMAN, J. K., SPALDING, J., CASPARY, W., RESNICK, M., STASIEWICZ, S., ANDERSON, B., and MINOR, R., 1987: Prediction of chemical carcinogenicity in rodents from in vitro genetic toxicity assays. Science 236, 933-941.
16. ZHANG, Y. P., SUSSMAN, N., MACINA, O. T., ROSENKRANZ, H. S., and KLOPMAN, G., 1996: Prediction of carcinogenicity of a second group of organic chemicals undergoing carcinogenicity testing. Environmental Health Perspectives 104, 1045-1050.