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 Hajian-Tilaki, K. O. Articles by Collet, J.-P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hajian-Tilaki, K. O. Articles by Collet, J.-P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Comparison of Parametric and Nonparametric Approaches to ROC Analysis of Quantitative Diagnostic Tests

James A. Hanley

Lawrence Joseph

Jean-Paul Collet

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, which yields indices of accuracy such as the area under the curve (AUC), is increasingly being used to evaluate the performances of diagnostic tests that produce results on continuous scales. Both par ametric and nonparametric ROC approaches are available to assess the discriminant capacity of such tests, but there are no clear guidelines as to the merits of each, particularly with non-binormal data. Investigators may worry that when data are non- Gaussian, estimates of diagnostic accuracy based on a binormal model may be dis torted. The authors conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to compare the bias and sampling variability in the estimates of the AUCs derived from parametric and nonparametric procedures. Each approach was assessed in data sets generated from various configurations of pairs of overlapping distributions; these included the binormal model and non-binormal pairs of distributions where one or both pair members were mixtures of Gaussian (MG) distributions with different degrees of departures from bi- normality. The biases in the estimates of the AUCs were found to be very small for both parametric and nonparametric procedures. The two approaches yielded very close estimates of the AUCs and of the corresponding sampling variability even when data were generated from non-binormal models. Thus, for a wide range of distributions, concern about bias or imprecision of the estimates of the AUC should not be a major factor in choosing between the nonparametric and parametric approaches. Key words: ROC analysis; quantitative diagnostic test; comparison, parametric; binormal model; LABROC; nonparametric procedure; area under the curve (AUC). (Med Decis Making 1997;17:94-102)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 17, No. 1, 94-102 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9701700111


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				References J. ICRU, April 1, 2008; 8(1): 57 - 62. [PDF]

				K. B. Giang, P. Allebeck, G. Kullgren, and N. van Tuan The Vietnamese Version of the Self Reporting Questionnaire 20 (SRQ-20) in Detecting Mental Disorders in Rural Vietnam: A Validation Study International Journal of Social Psychiatry, March 1, 2006; 52(2): 175 - 184. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. B. GIANG, F. SPAK, T. V. DZUNG, and P. ALLEBECK THE USE OF AUDIT TO ASSESS LEVEL OF ALCOHOL PROBLEMS IN RURAL VIETNAM Alcohol Alcohol., November 1, 2005; 40(6): 578 - 583. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. E Shapiro The interpretation of diagnostic tests Statistical Methods in Medical Research, April 1, 1999; 8(2): 113 - 134. [Abstract] [PDF]