A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies Export

@article{harbord:2007, abstract = {Studies of diagnostic accuracy require more sophisticated methods for their meta-analysis than studies of therapeutic interventions. A number of different, and apparently divergent, methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies have been proposed, including two alternative approaches that are statistically rigorous and allow for between-study variability: the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) model (Rutter and Gatsonis, 2001) and bivariate random-effects meta-analysis (van Houwelingen and others, 1993), (van Houwelingen and others, 2002), (Reitsma and others, 2005). We show that these two models are very closely related, and define the circumstances in which they are identical. We discuss the different forms of summary model output suggested by the two approaches, including summary ROC curves, summary points, confidence regions, and prediction regions. 10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004}, author = {Harbord, Roger M. and Deeks, Jonathan J. and Egger, Matthias and Whiting, Penny and Sterne, Jonathan A. C.}, citeulike-article-id = {1214430}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://biostatistics.oxfordjournals.org/content/kxl004v2/.abstract}, citeulike-linkout-2 = {http://biostatistics.oxfordjournals.org/content/kxl004v2/.full.pdf}, citeulike-linkout-3 = {http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/oup/biosts/2007/00000008/00000002/art00239}, citeulike-linkout-4 = {http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16698768}, citeulike-linkout-5 = {http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=16698768}, day = {5}, doi = {10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004}, issn = {1465-4644}, journal = {Biostat}, keywords = {bivariate, diagnostic\_accuracy, diagnostic\_studies, meta\_analysis}, month = {March}, number = {2}, pages = {kxl004--251}, posted-at = {2009-11-05 05:16:56}, priority = {0}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, title = {A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004}, volume = {8}, year = {2007} }

TY - JOUR ID - harbord:2007 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1214430 N2 - Studies of diagnostic accuracy require more sophisticated methods for their meta-analysis than studies of therapeutic interventions. A number of different, and apparently divergent, methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies have been proposed, including two alternative approaches that are statistically rigorous and allow for between-study variability: the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) model (Rutter and Gatsonis, 2001) and bivariate random-effects meta-analysis (van Houwelingen and others, 1993), (van Houwelingen and others, 2002), (Reitsma and others, 2005). We show that these two models are very closely related, and define the circumstances in which they are identical. We discuss the different forms of summary model output suggested by the two approaches, including summary ROC curves, summary points, confidence regions, and prediction regions. 10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004 IS - 2 JF - Biostat SN - 1465-4644 EP - 251 TI - A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies PB - Oxford University Press VL - 8 SP - kxl004 KW - bivariate KW - diagnostic_accuracy KW - diagnostic_studies KW - meta_analysis AU - Harbord, Roger AU - Deeks, Jonathan AU - Egger, Matthias AU - Whiting, Penny AU - Sterne, Jonathan PY - 2007/03/05/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxl004 ER -