A comparison of Bayesian and score methods for interval estimates of positive/negative likelihood ratios in support of diagnostic device performance evaluation.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Tingting Hu, Berkman Sahiner, Nicholas Petrick, Kenny Cha, Si Wen, Gene Pennello
{"title":"A comparison of Bayesian and score methods for interval estimates of positive/negative likelihood ratios in support of diagnostic device performance evaluation.","authors":"Tingting Hu, Berkman Sahiner, Nicholas Petrick, Kenny Cha, Si Wen, Gene Pennello","doi":"10.1080/10543406.2024.2364723","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR) are important metrics of accuracy for diagnostic devices with a binary output. However, the properties of Bayesian and frequentist interval estimators of PLR/NLR have not been extensively studied and compared. In this study, we explore the potential use of the Bayesian method for interval estimation of PLR/NLR, and, more broadly, for interval estimation of the ratio of two independent proportions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We develop a Bayesian-based approach for interval estimation of PLR/NLR for use as a part of a diagnostic device performance evaluation. Our approach is applicable to a broader setting for interval estimation of any ratio of two independent proportions. We compare score and Bayesian interval estimators for the ratio of two proportions in terms of the coverage probability (CP) and expected interval width (EW) via extensive experiments and applications to two case studies. A supplementary experiment was also conducted to assess the performance of the proposed exact Bayesian method under different priors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our experimental results show that the overall mean CP for Bayesian interval estimation is consistent with that for the score method (0.950 vs. 0.952), and the overall mean EW for Bayesian is shorter than that for score method (15.929 vs. 19.724). Application to two case studies showed that the intervals estimated using the Bayesian and frequentist approaches are very similar.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Our numerical results indicate that the proposed Bayesian approach has a comparable CP performance with the score method while yielding higher precision (i.e. a shorter EW).</p>","PeriodicalId":54870,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10543406.2024.2364723","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR) are important metrics of accuracy for diagnostic devices with a binary output. However, the properties of Bayesian and frequentist interval estimators of PLR/NLR have not been extensively studied and compared. In this study, we explore the potential use of the Bayesian method for interval estimation of PLR/NLR, and, more broadly, for interval estimation of the ratio of two independent proportions.

Methods: We develop a Bayesian-based approach for interval estimation of PLR/NLR for use as a part of a diagnostic device performance evaluation. Our approach is applicable to a broader setting for interval estimation of any ratio of two independent proportions. We compare score and Bayesian interval estimators for the ratio of two proportions in terms of the coverage probability (CP) and expected interval width (EW) via extensive experiments and applications to two case studies. A supplementary experiment was also conducted to assess the performance of the proposed exact Bayesian method under different priors.

Results: Our experimental results show that the overall mean CP for Bayesian interval estimation is consistent with that for the score method (0.950 vs. 0.952), and the overall mean EW for Bayesian is shorter than that for score method (15.929 vs. 19.724). Application to two case studies showed that the intervals estimated using the Bayesian and frequentist approaches are very similar.

Discussion: Our numerical results indicate that the proposed Bayesian approach has a comparable CP performance with the score method while yielding higher precision (i.e. a shorter EW).

比较贝叶斯法和记分法对阳性/阴性似然比的区间估计,以支持诊断设备性能评估。
背景:正似然比和负似然比(PLR 和 NLR)是二元输出诊断设备准确性的重要指标。然而,贝叶斯估计法和频数估计法对正似然比/负似然比的区间估计特性尚未进行广泛的研究和比较。在本研究中,我们探讨了使用贝叶斯方法对 PLR/NLR 进行区间估计的可能性,更广泛地说,还探讨了使用贝叶斯方法对两个独立比例的比值进行区间估计的可能性:方法:我们开发了一种基于贝叶斯法的 PLR/NLR 区间估计方法,作为诊断设备性能评估的一部分。我们的方法适用于更广泛的两个独立比例的任何比率的区间估计。我们通过广泛的实验和两个案例研究的应用,从覆盖概率 (CP) 和预期区间宽度 (EW) 的角度比较了两个比例比率的得分区间估计法和贝叶斯区间估计法。我们还进行了一项补充实验,以评估所提出的精确贝叶斯方法在不同先验条件下的性能:我们的实验结果表明,贝叶斯区间估计的总体平均 CP 与分数法一致(0.950 对 0.952),贝叶斯的总体平均 EW 比分数法短(15.929 对 19.724)。对两个案例的应用表明,贝叶斯法和频数法估计的区间非常相似:我们的数值结果表明,所提出的贝叶斯方法的 CP 性能与分数方法相当,但精度更高(即 EW 更短)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics
Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 医学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
18.20%
发文量
71
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, a rapid publication journal, discusses quality applications of statistics in biopharmaceutical research and development. Now publishing six times per year, it includes expositions of statistical methodology with immediate applicability to biopharmaceutical research in the form of full-length and short manuscripts, review articles, selected/invited conference papers, short articles, and letters to the editor. Addressing timely and provocative topics important to the biostatistical profession, the journal covers: Drug, device, and biological research and development; Drug screening and drug design; Assessment of pharmacological activity; Pharmaceutical formulation and scale-up; Preclinical safety assessment; Bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetics; Phase, I, II, and III clinical development including complex innovative designs; Premarket approval assessment of clinical safety; Postmarketing surveillance; Big data and artificial intelligence and applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信