Comparing and combining data across multiple sources via integration of paired-sample data to correct for measurement error

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 31, Issue 28, 2012, Pages 3748-3759

  Huang, Yunda ^a   Huang, Ying ^a   Moodie, Zoe ^a   Li, Sue ^a   Self, Steve ^a,b  

^a Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Assay comparison; Inter laboratory measurement error; Multiple data sources; Regression calibration

Indexed keywords

HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS VACCINE;

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOSPOT ASSAY; IMMUNE RESPONSE; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; SAMPLE SIZE; SIMULATION; VACCINE PRODUCTION;

AIDS VACCINES; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CALIBRATION; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ENZYME-LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; HUMANS; LABORATORIES; MULTICENTER STUDIES AS TOPIC; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84870240708     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5446     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Spiegelman D, Carroll R, Kipnis V. Efficient regression calibration for logistic regression in main study/internal validation study designs with an imperfect reference instrument. Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20:139-160.
2. Thurston S, Williams P, Hauser R, et al. A comparison of regression calibration approaches for designs with internal validation data. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 2003; 131:175-190.
3. Britten CM, Gouttefangeas C, Welters MJ, et al. The CIMT-monitoring panel: a two-step approach to harmonize the enumeration of antigen-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes by structural and functional assays. Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy 2008; 57:289-302.
4. Mander A, Gouttefangeas C, Ottensmeier C, et al. Serum is not required for ex-vivo IFN-gamma ELISpot: a collaborative study of different protocols from the European CIMT Immunoguiding Program. Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy 2010; 59:619-627.
5. Dilbinder G, Huang Y, Levine L, et al. Equivalence of ELISpot assays demonstrated between major HIV network laboratories. PLoS ONE 2010; 5(12):e14330. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014330.
6. Todd C, Greene K, Yu X, et al. Development and implementation of an international proficiency testing program for a neutralizing antibody assay for HIV-1 in TZM-bl cells. Journal of Immunological Methods 2012; 375:57-67.
7. Fuller W. Measurement Error Models. Wiley: New York, 1987.
8. Buonaccorsi JP. Measurement Error: Models, Methods, and Applications, 1st edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, 2010.
9. Staudenmayer J, Buonaccorsi J. Accounting for measurement error in linear autoregressive time series models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2005; 100:841-852.
10. Buonaccorsi J. Estimation in two-stage models with heteroscedasticity. International Statistical Review 2006; 74:403-415.
11. Buchbinder S, Mehrotra D, Duerr A, et al. Efficacy assessment of a cell-mediated immunity HIV-1 vaccine (the step study): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, test-of-concept trial. Lancet 2008; 372(9653):1881-1893.
12. McElrath M, DeRosa C, Moodie Z, et al. HIV-1 vaccine-induced immunity in the test-of-concept step study: a case cohort analysis. Lancet 2008; 372(9653):1894-1905.
13. Prentice R. Covariate measurement errors in the analysis of cohort studies. In Survival Analysis, Vol.2, Johnson R, Crowley J (eds), IMS Lecture Notes, Monograph Series. Institute of Mathematical Statitistics: Beachwood, OH, 1982; 137-151.
14. Carroll R, Stefanski L. Approximate quasilikelihood estimation in models with surrogate predictors. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1990; 85:652-663.
15. Gleser L. Improvements of the naïve approach to estimation in non-linear errors-in-variables regression models. In Statistical Analysis of Measurement Error Models and Applications, Brown FWPJ (ed.). American Mathematical Society: Providence, RI, 1990.