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 Google Scholar Articles by Kester, A. D.M. Articles by Buntinx, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kester, A. D.M. Articles by Buntinx, F. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Meta-analysis of ROC Curves

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Kester: Department of Methodology and Statistics, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands, e-mail: <Arnold.Kester{at}stat.unimaas.NL>

Frank Buntinx, MD, PhD

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Kester: Department of Methodology and Statistics, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands, e-mail: <Arnold.Kester{at}stat.unimaas.NL>

The authors present a method to combine several independent studies of the same (continuous or semiquantitative) diagnostic test, where each study reports a complete ROC curve; a plot of the true-positive rate or sensitivity against the false-positive rate or one minus the specificity. The result of the analysis is a pooled ROC curve, with a confidence band, as opposed to earlier proposals that result in a pooled area under the ROC curve. The analysis is based on a two-parameter model for the ROC curve that can be estimated for each individual curve. The parameters are then pooled with a bivariate random-effects meta-analytic method, and a curve can be drawn from the pooled parameters. The authors propose to use a model that specifies a linear relation between the logistic transformations of sensitivity and one minus specificity. Specifically, they define V = In(sensitivity/(1 - sensitivity)) and U = In((1 - specificity)/specificity), and then D = V - U, S = V + U. The model is defined as D = + ßS. The parameters and ß are estimated using weighted linear regression with bootstrapping to get the standard errors, or using maximum likelihood. The authors show how the procedure works with continuous test data and with categorical test data. Key words: diagnostic test; ROC curve; bivariate meta-analysis; bootstrap; maximum likelihood estimate. (Med Decis Making 2000;20:430-439)

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Gatsonis and P. Paliwal Meta-analysis of diagnostic and screening test accuracy evaluations: methodologic primer. Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): 271 - 281. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. B. C. Vasbinder, P. J. Nelemans, A. G.H. Kessels, A. A. Kroon, P. W. de Leeuw, and J. M.A. van Engelshoven Diagnostic Tests for Renal Artery Stenosis in Patients Suspected of Having Renovascular Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis Ann Intern Med, September 18, 2001; 135(6): 401 - 411. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]