Journal of Statistical Theory and Practice

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 482–508 | Cite as

Empirical Likelihood Confidence Intervals for the Difference of Areas Under Two Correlated ROC Curves

  • Dong ZhangEmail author
  • Biao Zhang


The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, AUC, is commonly used to assess the ability of a diagnostic test to correctly classify individuals into diseased and nondiseased populations. When there are two diagnostic tests available, it is of interest to evaluate and compare their performances. Based on the difference of two placement values, we propose a two-sample empirical likelihood method for comparing AUCs of two ROC curves. The proposed empirical likelihood ratio statistic converges in distribution to a scaled chi-squared random variable. Simulation results show that the proposed empirical likelihood method has a better finite-sample performance than other competitors.


Receiver operating characteristic curve Area under curve Empirical likelihood Placement value Sensitivity Specificity 

AMS Subject Classification

62G05 62G20 62G86 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bamber, D. 1975. The area above the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating characteristic curve graph. J. Math. Psychol., 12, 387–415.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Campbell, G. 1994. Advances in statistical methodology for the evaluation of diagnostic and laboratory tests. Stat. Med., 13, 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Delong, E., D. Delong, and D. Clarke-Pearson. 1988. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics, 44, 837–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Greenhouse, S., and N. Mantel. 1950. The evaluation of diagnostic tests. Biometrics, 6, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hall P., and B. La Scala. 1990. Methodology and algorithm of empirical likelihood. Int. Stat. Rev., 58, 109–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hanley, J., and B. McNeil. 1983. A method of comparing the area under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hjort, N., I. McKeage, and I. Keilegom. 2009. Extending the scope of empirical likelihood. Ann. Stat., 37, 1079–s1111.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hsieh, F., and B. Turnbull. 1996. Nonparametric and semiparametric estimation of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Ann. Stat., 24, 25–40.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Krzanowski, W., and D. Hand. 2009. ROC curves for continuous data. London, UK: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Linnet, K. 1987. Comparison of quantitative diagnostic tests: Type I error, power and sample size. Stat. Med., 6, 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McClish, D. 1987. Comparing the areas under more than two independent roc curves. Med. Decision Making, 7, 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Obuchowski, N., and D. McClish. 1997. Sample size determination for diagnostic accuracy studies involving binormal ROC curve indices. Stat Med., 16, 1529–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Owen, A. 1988. Empirical likelihood ratio confidence intervals for a single functional. Biometrika, 75, 237–249.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Owen, A. 1990. Empirical likelihood ratio confidence regions. Ann. Stat., 18, 90–120.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Owen, A. 2001. Empirical likelihood. London, UK: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pepe, M. 2003. The statistical evaluation of medical tests for classification and prediction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Pepe, M., and T. Cai. 2004. The analysis of placement values for evaluating discriminatory measures. Biometrics, 60, 528–535.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Qin, G., and X. Zhou. 2006. Empirical likelihood inference for the area under the ROC curve. Biometrics, 62, 613–622.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Van Der Vaart, A. 1998. Asymptotic statistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Venkatraman, E., and C. Begg. 1996. A distribution free procedure for comparing receiver operating characteristic curves from a paired experiment. Biometrika, 83, 835–848.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wieand, S., M. Gail, B. James, and K. James. 1989. A family of nonparametric statistics for comparing diagnostic markers with paired or unpaired data. Biometrika, 76, 585–592.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zou, K. 2001. Comparison of correlated receiver operating characteristic curves derived from repeated diagnostic test data. Acad. Radiol., 8, 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Grace Scientific Publishing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics, Computer Science, and StatisticsBloomsburg UniversityBloomsburgUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of ToledoToledoUSA

Personalised recommendations