Advertisement

A New Methodologic Look at Describing the Performance of Diagnostic Classification Procedures in Medicine

  • Olaf Gefeller
  • Hermann Brenner
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)

Summary

A simple method is delineated for correcting the fundamental measures of validity of binary diagnostic tests, sensitivity and specificity, for the presence of chance agreement between classification result and true status. While recent proposals of such chance—correction techniques result in an undesirable dependence of the measures on the disease prevalence, our approach overcomes this deficit. Point and interval estimates of the chance—corrected measures are derived.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BENNETT, B.M. (1983). Further results on indices of diagnostic screening II. Biometrical Journal, 25, 453–457.Google Scholar
  2. BLOCH, D.A., and KRAEMER, H.C. (1989). 2 × 2 Kappa coefficients: measures of agreement or association. Biometrics, 45, 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. COHEN, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. COUGHLIN, S.S., and PICKLE, L.W. (1992). Sensitivity and specificity-like measures of the validity of a diagnostic test that are corrected for chance agreement. Epidemiology, 3, 178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. FLEISS, J.L. (1975). Measuring agreement between two judges on the presence or absence of trait. Biometrics, 31, 651–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. GEFELLER, O., and BRENNER, H. (1994). How to correct for chance agreement in the estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests.Methods of Information in Medicine, 33, 180–186.Google Scholar
  7. JAMART, J. (1992). Chance-corrected sensitivity and specificity for three-zone diagnostic tests. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 45, 1035–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. WHITE, A., and LANDIS, J.R. (1982). A general categorical data methodology for evaluating medical diagnostic tests. Communications in Statistics — Theory and Methods, All, 567–605.Google Scholar
  9. YERUSHALMY, J. (1947). Statistical problems in assessing methods of medical diagnosis. Public Health Reports, 62, 1432–1449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olaf Gefeller
    • 1
  • Hermann Brenner
    • 2
  1. 1.Abt. Medizinische StatistikUniversität GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  2. 2.Institut für Med. Informationsverarbeitung, Biometrie und EpidemiologieLudwig-Maximilians-UniversitätMünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations