|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
The Robustness of the "Binormal" Assumptions Used in Fitting ROC Curves
James A. Hanley, PhD
The binormal form is the most common model used to formally fit ROC curves to the data from signal detection studies that employ the "rating" method. The author lists a number of justifications that have been offered for this choice, ranging from theoretical considerations of probability laws and signal detection theory, to mathematical tractability and convenience, to empirical results showing that "it fits!" To these justifications is added another, namely that even if an alternative formulation based on another underlying form (e.g., power law) or model (e.g., binomial, Poisson, or gamma type distributions) were in fact correct, the binormal fit differs so little from the true form as to be of no practical consequence. Moreover, the small lack of fit is unlikely to be demonstrated in practice: it is obscured by the much larger variation that can be attributed to sampling of cases. In addition, even if a very large sample of cases could be studied, the small number of rating categories used does not permit seemingly very different models to be distinguished from one another. Key words: binormal assumptions; ROC curves; signal detection theory; rating method. (Med Decis Making 8:197-203, 1988)
Medical Decision Making, Vol. 8, No. 3,
197-203 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8800800308
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
E D Edwards, C V E Powell, B W Mason, and A Oliver
Prospective cohort study to test the predictability of the Cardiff and Vale paediatric early warning system
Arch. Dis. Child.,
August 1, 2009;
94(8):
602 - 606.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Janes and M. S. Pepe
Adjusting for covariate effects on classification accuracy using the covariate-adjusted receiver operating characteristic curve
Biometrika,
June 1, 2009;
96(2):
371 - 382.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Mossman
Conceptualizing and Characterizing Accuracy in Assessments of Competence to Stand Trial
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law,
September 1, 2008;
36(3):
340 - 351.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Janes and M. S. Pepe
Adjusting for Covariates in Studies of Diagnostic, Screening, or Prognostic Markers: An Old Concept in a New Setting
Am. J. Epidemiol.,
July 1, 2008;
168(1):
89 - 97.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Sonego, A. Kocsor, and S. Pongor
ROC analysis: applications to the classification of biological sequences and 3D structures
Brief Bioinform,
May 1, 2008;
9(3):
198 - 209.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
J. ICRU,
April 1, 2008;
8(1):
57 - 62.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Pashayan, C. Duff, and B. W. Mason
Selection into specialty training in public health: performance of the Medical Training Application Service shortlisting
J. Public Health Med.,
December 1, 2007;
29(4):
331 - 337.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Sadatsafavi, A. Moayyeri, H. Bahrami, and A. Soltani
The Value of Bayes Theorem in the Interpretation of Subjective Diagnostic Findings: What Can We Learn from Agreement Studies?
Med Decis Making,
December 1, 2007;
27(6):
735 - 743.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Bath and L G Mansson
Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis: a non-parametric rank-invariant statistical method for image quality evaluation
Br. J. Radiol.,
March 1, 2007;
80(951):
169 - 176.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. H. Zou, A. J. O'Malley, and L. Mauri
Receiver-Operating Characteristic Analysis for Evaluating Diagnostic Tests and Predictive Models
Circulation,
February 6, 2007;
115(5):
654 - 657.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Boone, K. K. Lindfors, and J. A. Seibert
Determining Sensitivity of Mammography from Screening Data, Cancer Incidence, and Receiver-Operating Characteristic Curve Parameters
Med Decis Making,
June 1, 2002;
22(3):
228 - 237.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. S. Heckerling
Parametric Three-Way Receiver Operating Characteristic Surface Analysis Using Mathematica
Med Decis Making,
October 1, 2001;
21(5):
409 - 417.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. D.M. Kester and F. Buntinx
Meta-analysis of ROC Curves
Med Decis Making,
October 1, 2000;
20(4):
430 - 439.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. J. Walsh
Goodness-of-fit Issues in ROC Curve Estimation
Med Decis Making,
April 1, 1999;
19(2):
193 - 201.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Douglas
Plotting ROC Curves: Giving Us Fits
Med Decis Making,
April 1, 1999;
19(2):
214 - 215.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Mossman
Three-way ROCs
Med Decis Making,
January 1, 1999;
19(1):
78 - 89.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Hellmich, K. R. Abrams, D. R. Jones, and P. C. Lambert
A Bayesian Approach to a General Regression Model for ROC Curves
Med Decis Making,
October 1, 1998;
18(4):
436 - 443.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. O. Hajian-Tilaki, J. A. Hanley, L. Joseph, and J.-P. Collet
A Comparison of Parametric and Nonparametric Approaches to ROC Analysis of Quantitative Diagnostic Tests
Med Decis Making,
February 1, 1997;
17(1):
94 - 102.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Somoza
Eccentric Diagnostic Tests: Redefining Sensitivity and Specificity
Med Decis Making,
February 1, 1996;
16(1):
15 - 23.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Mossman
Resampling Techniques in the Analysis of Non-binormal ROC Data
Med Decis Making,
October 1, 1995;
15(4):
358 - 366.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X. H. Zhou
Testing an Underlying Assumption on a ROC Curve Based on Rating Data
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1995;
15(3):
276 - 282.
[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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Somoza
Classifying Binormal Diagnostic Tests Using Separation - Asymmetry Diagrams with Constant-performance Curves
Med Decis Making,
April 1, 1994;
14(2):
157 - 168.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Littenberg and L. E. Moses
Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy from Multiple Conflicting Reports: A New Meta-analytic Method
Med Decis Making,
December 1, 1993;
13(4):
313 - 321.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Somoza and D. Mossman
Comparing and Optimizing Diagnostic Tests: An Information-theoretical Approach
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1992;
12(3):
179 - 188.
[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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Sainfort
Eualuation of Medical Technologies: A Generalized ROC Analysis
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1991;
11(3):
208 - 220.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. M. Centor
Signal Detectability: The Use of ROC Curves and Their Analyses
Med Decis Making,
June 1, 1991;
11(2):
102 - 106.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. K. McClish
Determining a Range of False-positive Rates for Which ROC Curves Differ
Med Decis Making,
December 1, 1990;
10(4):
283 - 287.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. K. McClish
Analyzing a Portion of the ROC Curve
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1989;
9(3):
190 - 195.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. F. Quinn
Relation of Observer Agreement to Accuracy According to a Two-receiver Signal Detection Model of Diagnosis
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1989;
9(3):
196 - 206.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. A. Tosteson and C. B. Begg
A General Regression Methodology for ROC Curve Estimation
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 1988;
8(3):
204 - 215.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
