Correcting for rater bias in scores on a continuous scale, with application to breast density

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 32, Issue 26, 2013, Pages 4666-4678

  Sperrin, Matthew ^b   Bardwell, Lawrence ^a   Sergeant, Jamie C ^b   Astley, Susan ^b   Buchan, Iain ^b  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast density; Inter rater agreement; Observer bias

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTINUOUS PROCESS; DENSITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; OBSERVER BIAS; PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; SIMULATION; STANDARDIZATION; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; MAMMOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 84885434300     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5848     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. The Lancet 1986; 327:307-310.
2. McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods 1996; 1:30-46.
3. Lin L. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989; 45:255-268.
4. Barnhart HX, Haber M, Song J. Overall concordance correlation coefficient for evaluating agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics 2002; 58:1020-1027.
5. Carrasco J, King T, Chinchilli V. The concordance correlation coefficient for repeated measures estimated by variance components. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 19(1):90-105.
6. Haber M, Barnhart HX, Song J, Gruden J. Observer variability: a new approach in evaluating interobserver agreement. Journal of Data Science 2005; 3:69-83.
7. Mielke P, Berry KJ. Permutation Methods: A Distance Function Approach. Springer-Verlag: New York, 2001.
8. Pan Y, Haber M, Barnhart H. A new permutation-based method for assessing agreement between two observers making replicated binary readings. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 30(8):839-853.
9. Haber M, Gao J, Barnhart H. Evaluation of agreement between measurement methods from data with matched repeated measurements via the coefficient of individual agreement. Journal of Data Science 2010; 8(3):457-469.
10. Haber M, Barnhart H. A general approach to evaluating agreement between two observers or methods of measurement from quantitative data with replicated measurements. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2008; 17(2):151-169.
11. Barnhart HX, Haber MJ, Lin LI. An overview on assessing agreement with continuous measurements. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2007; 17(4):529-569.
12. Dunn G, Roberts C. Modelling method comparison data. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 1999; 8:161-179.
13. Alanen E. Everything all right in method comparison studies? Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2012; 21(4):297-309.
14. Melzack R. The short-form McGill pain questionnaire. Pain 1987; 30(2):191-197.
15. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain 1983; 17(1):45-56.
16. Goodenough B, Thomas W, Champion GD, Perrott D, Taplin JE, von Baeyer CL, Ziegler JB. Unravelling age effects and sex differences in needle pain: ratings of sensory intensity and unpleasantness of venipuncture pain by children and their parents. Pain 1999; 80(1-2):179-190.
17. Valentin L. Pattern recognition of pelvic masses by gray-scale ultrasound imaging: the contribution of Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 1999; 14(5):338-347.
18. Evans DG, Warwick J, Astley SM, Stavrinos P, Sahin S, Ingham S, McBurney H, Eckersley B, Harvie M, Wilson M, Beetles U, Warren R, Hufton A, Sergeant JC, Newman WG, Buchan I, Cuzick J, Howell A. Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the UK National Health Service breast screening programme: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prevention Research 2012; 5(7):943-951.
19. McCormack VA, dos SantosSilva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention 2006; 15:1159-1169.
20. Cummings SR, Tice JA, Bauer S, Browner WS, Cuzick J, Ziv E, Vogel V, Shepherd J, Vachon C, Smith-Bindman R, Kerlikowske K. Prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women: approaches to estimating and reducing risk. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2009; 101(6):384-398.
21. Howell A, Astley S, Warwick J, Stavrinos P, Sahin S, Ingham S, McBurney H, Eckersley B, Harvie M, Wilson M, Beetles U, Warren R, Hufton A, Sergeant J, Newman W, Buchan I, Cuzick J, Evans DG. Prevention of breast cancer in the context of a national breast screening programme. Journal of Internal Medicine 2012; 271:321-330.
22. Tice JA, Cummings SR, Ziv E, Kerlikowske K. Mammographic breast density and the Gail model for breast cancer risk prediction in a screening population. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2005; 94(2):115-122.
23. Palomares MR, Machia JR, Lehman CD, Daling JR, McTiernan A. Mammographic density correlation with Gail model breast cancer risk estimates and component risk factors. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention 2006; 15(7):1324-1330.
24. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Atlas, Breast imaging reporting and data system: ACR BI-RADS. American College of Radiology: Reston, VA, 2003.
25. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, Stone J, Fishell E, Jong RA, Hislop G, Chiarelli A, Minkin S, Yaffe MJ. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 356:227-236.
26. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Physics in Medicine and Biology 1994; 39:1629-1638.
27. Duffy SW, Nagtegaal ID, Astley SM, Gillan MGC, McGee MA, Boggis CRM, Wilson M, Beetles UM, Griffiths MA, Jain AK, Johnson J, Roberts R, Deans H, Duncan KA, Iyengar G, Griffiths PM, Warwick J, Cuzick J, Gilbert FJ. Visually assessed breast density: the need for two views. Breast Cancer Research 2008; 10:R64.
28. Lokate M, Kallenberg MGJ, Karssemeijer N, VanderBosch MAAJ, Peeters PHM, VanGils CH. Volumetric breast density from full-field digital mammograms and its association with breast cancer risk factors: a comparison with a threshold method. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention 2010; 19(12):3096-3105.
29. Wolfe J. A study of breast parenchyma by mammography in the normal woman and those with benign and malignant disease. Radiology 1967; 89(2):201-205.
30. American College of Radiology. Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). American College of Radiology: Reston, 2003.
31. Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23(7):1111-1130.
32. Nutine L, Sergeant JC, Morris J, Stavrinos P, Evans DG, Howell A, Boggis C, Wilson M, Barr N, Astley SM. Volumetric and area-based measures of mammographic density in women with and without cancer, 2012.
33. Sergeant J, Warwick J, Evans D, Howell A, Berks M, Stavrinos P, Sahin S, Wilson M, Hufton A, Buchan I, Astley S. Volumetric and area-based breast density measurement in the predicting risk of cancer at screening (PROCAS) study. Breast Imaging 2012; 7361:228-235.
34. Hartman K, Highnam R, Warren R, Jackson V. Volumetric assessment of breast tissue composition from FFDM images. In IWDM 2008, vol.5116, Krupinski EA (ed.), LNCS. Springer: Heidelberg; 33-39.
35. Highnam R, Brady SM, Yaffe MJ, Karssemeijer N, Harvey J. Robust breast composition measurement-Volpara™. In IWDM 2010, vol.6136, Marti J, Oliver A, Freixenet J, Marti R (eds), LNCS. Springer: Heidelberg; 342-349.
36. Barnhart HX, Song J, Haber MJ. Assessing intra, inter and total agreement with replicated readings. Statistics in Medicine 2005; 24:1371-1384.
37. Bankier A, De M V, Keyzer C, Gevenois P. Pulmonary emphysema: subjective visual grading versus objective quantification with macroscopic morphometry and thin-section CT densitometry. Radiology 1999; 211(3):851-858.
38. Rhodes D, Koshy R, Waterfield W, Wu A, Grossman S. Feasibility of quantitative pain assessment in outpatient oncology practice. Journal of clinical oncology 2001; 19(2):501-508.
39. Sprikkelman A, Tupker R, Burgerhof H, Schouten J, Brand P, Heymans H, Aalderen W. Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: a comparison of three scoring systems. Allergy 2007; 52(9):944-949.
40. Charman C, Venn A, Williams H. Measurement of body surface area involvement in atopic eczema: an impossible task? British Journal of Dermatology 1999; 140:109-111.
41. Hettiaratchy S, Papini R. Abc of burns: initial management of a major burn: II-assessment and resuscitation. British Medical Journal 2004; 329(7457):101.