This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Diamond, G. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Diamond, G. A. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Off Bayes

Effect of Verification Bias on Posterior Probabilities Calculated Using Bayes' Theorem

Estimates of sensitivity and specificity can be biased by the preferential referral of patients with positive test responses or ancillary clinical abnormalities (the "concomitant information vector") for diagnostic verification. When these biased estimates are analyzed by Bayes' theorem, the resultant posterior disease probabilities (positive and negative predictive ac curacies) are similarly biased. Accordingly, a series of computer simulations was performed to quantify the effects of various degrees of verification bias on the calculation of predictive accuracy using Bayes' theorem. The magnitudes of the errors in the observed true-positive rate (sensitivity) and false-positive rate (the complement of specificity) ranged from + 11% and +23%, respectively (when the test response and the concomitant information vector were conditionally independent), to + 16% and + 48% (when they were conditionally non- independent) These errors produced absolute underestimations as high as 22% in positive predictive accuracy, and as high as 14% in negative predictive accuracy, when analyzed by Bayes' theorem at a base rate of 50%. Mathematical correction for biased verification based on the test response using a previously published algorithm significantly reduced these errors by as much as 20%. These data indicate 1) that selection bias significantly distorts the determination of predictive accuracies calculated by Bayes' theorem, and 2) that these distortions can be significantly offset by a correction algorithm Key words: diagnosis, pre dictive accuracy; selection bias; sensitivity, specificity, testing. (Med Decis Making 1992;12: 22-31)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 12, No. 1, 22-30 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9201200105


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. H. Mieres, L. J. Shaw, A. Arai, M. J. Budoff, S. D. Flamm, W. G. Hundley, T. H. Marwick, L. Mosca, A. R. Patel, M. A. Quinones, et al. Role of Noninvasive Testing in the Clinical Evaluation of Women With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: Consensus Statement From the Cardiac Imaging Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, American Heart Association Circulation, February 8, 2005; 111(5): 682 - 696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Whiting, A. W.S. Rutjes, J. B. Reitsma, A. S. Glas, P. M.M. Bossuyt, and J. Kleijnen Sources of Variation and Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: A Systematic Review Ann Intern Med, February 3, 2004; 140(3): 189 - 202. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M. Bossuyt, J. B. Reitsma, D. E. Bruns, C. A. Gatsonis, P. P. Glasziou, L. M. Irwig, D. Moher, D. Rennie, H. C.W. de Vet, and J. G. Lijmer The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration Ann Intern Med, January 7, 2003; 138(1): W1 - W12. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. C. Reid, M. S. Lachs, and A. R. Feinstein Use of Methodological Standards in Diagnostic Test Research: Getting Better but Still Not Good JAMA, August 23, 1995; 274(8): 645 - 651. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. I. Taragin, D. Wildman, and R. Trout Assessing Disease Prevalence from Inaccurate Test Results: Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks Med Decis Making, October 1, 1994; 14(4): 369 - 373. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Y. T. Van Der Schouw, H. Straatman, and A. L.M. Verbeek ROC Curves and the Areas under Them for Dichotomized Tests: Empirical Findings for Logistically and Normally Distributed Diagnostic Test Results Med Decis Making, October 1, 1994; 14(4): 374 - 381. [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]