On simultaneous assessment of sensitivity and specificity when combining two diagnostic tests

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 23, Issue 23, 2004, Pages 3593-3605

  Tang, Man Lai ^a,b  

^a HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Combined test; Component test; Sensitivity; Simultaneous hypotheses; Specificity

Indexed keywords

METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M;

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; NASOPHARYNX CARCINOMA; SAMPLE SIZE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS;

BIOMETRY; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NASOPHARYNGEAL NEOPLASMS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TECHNETIUM TC 99M SESTAMIBI; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 9244241481     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.1906     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Marshall RJ. The predictive value of simple rules for combining two diagnostic tests. Biometrics 1989; 45: 1213-1222.
2. Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L, Franco EL. Assessing the gain in diagnostic performance when combining two diagnostic tests. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:2527-2546.
3. McIntosh M, Pepe MS. Combining several screening tests: optimality of the risk score. Biometrics 2002; 58: 657-664.
4. Pepe MS. The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction. Oxford University Press: New York, 2003.
5. Kao CH, Shiau YC, Shen YY, Yen RF. Detection of recurrent or persistent nasopharyngeal carcinomas after radiotherapy with technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile single photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography. Cancer 2002; 94 7):1981-1986.
6. Lui KJ, Cumberland WG. Sample size determination for equivalence test using rate ratio of sensitivity and specificity in paired sample data. Controlled Clinical Trials 2001; 22 373-389.
7. Tang ML. Matched-pair noninferiority trials using rate ratio: a comparison of current methods and sample size refinement. Controlled Clinical Trials 2003; 24(4):364-377.
8. Hwang IK, Morikawa T. Design issues in noninferiority/equivalence trails. Drug Information Journal 1999; 33:1205-1218.
9. Basu D. On the elimination of nuisance parameters. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1977; 72:355-366.
10. Casella G, Berger RL. Statistical Inference. Wadsworth: Belmont, CA, 1990.
11. Heeren T, D'Agostino RB. Robustness of the two independent sample t-test when applied to ordinal scaled data. Statistics in Medicine 1987; 6:79-90.
12. Chen JJ, Tsong Y, Kang KH. Tests for equivalence or noninferiority between two proportions. Drug Information Journal 2000; 34:569-578.