|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Testing for Fetal Pulmonary Maturity
ROC Analysis Involving Covariates, Verification Bias, and Combination Testing
Maria G.M. Hunink, MD, PhD
Douglas K. Richardson, MD, MBA
Peter M. Doubilet, MD, PhD
Colin B. Begg, PhD
The lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio (US) and the measured value of saturated phosphatidyl choline (SPC), amniotic fluid determinations obtained to assess fetal pulmonary maturity, were evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The effects of covariates on the ROC curves were analyzed with a regression methodology that took into account all the available data when constructing an ROC curve for each subgroup. To correct for verification bias the authors used a logistic regression analysis to model the probability of verification, thereby permitting correction for verification bias of a fully stratified data set in spite of small cell frequencies. They examined combination testing with prediction rules using prospective logistic modeling, including as variables test results and clinical features. The US was found to be significantly better than SPC for assessing fetal pulmonary maturity. For older gestational age the US and SPC performed better than for younger gestational age. Contamination of the specimen degraded the ROC curves. Correcting for verification bias did not influence the ROC curves significantly but changed the cutoff value of the test variable for any particular operating point. Prediction rules to evaluate combination testing showed that obtaining the SPC level in addition to the US ratio added no significant infor mation compared with the US only. Including gestational age in the prediction rule of either test improved the prediction. Key words: receiver operating characteristic curve; fetal pul monary maturity testing; covariates; verification bias; combination testing. (Med Decis Mak ing 1990;10:201-211)
Medical Decision Making, Vol. 10, No. 3,
201-211 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9001000307

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. van Leeuwen, E. J.K. Zweers, B. C. Opmeer, E. van Ballegooie, H. G. ter Brugge, H. W. de Valk, B. W.J. Mol, and G. H.A. Visser
Comparison of Accuracy Measures of Two Screening Tests for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus
Diabetes Care,
November 1, 2007;
30(11):
2779 - 2784.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. G. Lijmer, B. W. Mol, S. Heisterkamp, G. J. Bonsel, M. H. Prins, J. H. P. van der Meulen, and P. M. M. Bossuyt
Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests
JAMA,
September 15, 1999;
282(11):
1061 - 1066.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
X.-H. Zhou
Correcting for verification bias in studies of a diagnostic test's accuracy
Statistical Methods in Medical Research,
August 1, 1998;
7(4):
337 - 353.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. F. Raubertas, L. E. Rodewald, S. G. Humiston, and P. G. Szilagyi
ROC Curves for Classification Trees
Med Decis Making,
April 1, 1994;
14(2):
169 - 174.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. A. Diamond
What Is the Effect of Sampling Error on ROC Analysis in the Face of Verification Bias?
Med Decis Making,
June 1, 1992;
12(2):
155 - 156.
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. A. Diamond
Scotched on the ROCs
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1991;
11(3):
198 - 200.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. G.M. Hunink and C. B. Begg
Diamond's Correction Method-A Real Gem or Just Cubic Zirconium?
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1991;
11(3):
201 - 203.
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. A. Hanley
Verification Bias and the One-parameter Logistic ROC Curve--Some Clarifications
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1991;
11(3):
203 - 207.
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|