Clinical validity: defining biomarker performance.

Patrick M M Bossuyt
{"title":"Clinical validity: defining biomarker performance.","authors":"Patrick M M Bossuyt","doi":"10.3109/00365513.2010.493383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A central phase in the evaluation of a biomarker is the assessment of its clinical validity. In most cases, clinical validity will be expressed in terms of the marker's diagnostic accuracy: the degree to which it can be used to identify diseased patients or, more generally, patients with the target condition. Diagnostic accuracy is evaluated in diagnostic accuracy studies, in which the biomarker values are compared to the outcome of the clinical reference standard in the same patients. There are several ways in which the results of diagnostic accuracy studies can be summarized, reported, and interpreted. We present an overview and a critical commentary of the available measures. We classify them as error-based measures, information-based measures, and measures of the strength of the association.The diagnostic accuracy is not a fixed property of a marker. All accuracy measures may vary between studies, not just through chance, but also with changes in the definition of the target condition, the spectrum of disease, the setting, and the amount of prior testing. We discuss the relativity of the claim that likelihood ratios are a superior way of expressing the accuracy of biomarkers, and defend the use of the sometimes downgraded statistics sensitivity and specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":76518,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation. Supplementum","volume":"242 ","pages":"46-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00365513.2010.493383","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation. Supplementum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/00365513.2010.493383","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

A central phase in the evaluation of a biomarker is the assessment of its clinical validity. In most cases, clinical validity will be expressed in terms of the marker's diagnostic accuracy: the degree to which it can be used to identify diseased patients or, more generally, patients with the target condition. Diagnostic accuracy is evaluated in diagnostic accuracy studies, in which the biomarker values are compared to the outcome of the clinical reference standard in the same patients. There are several ways in which the results of diagnostic accuracy studies can be summarized, reported, and interpreted. We present an overview and a critical commentary of the available measures. We classify them as error-based measures, information-based measures, and measures of the strength of the association.The diagnostic accuracy is not a fixed property of a marker. All accuracy measures may vary between studies, not just through chance, but also with changes in the definition of the target condition, the spectrum of disease, the setting, and the amount of prior testing. We discuss the relativity of the claim that likelihood ratios are a superior way of expressing the accuracy of biomarkers, and defend the use of the sometimes downgraded statistics sensitivity and specificity.

临床效度:定义生物标志物的性能。
生物标志物评估的中心阶段是评估其临床有效性。在大多数情况下,临床有效性将根据标志物的诊断准确性来表示:它可以用于识别患病患者的程度,或者更一般地说,具有目标病症的患者。诊断准确性在诊断准确性研究中进行评估,其中将生物标志物值与同一患者的临床参考标准结果进行比较。有几种方法可以总结、报告和解释诊断准确性研究的结果。我们对现有的措施进行概述和评论。我们将它们分为基于错误的度量、基于信息的度量和关联强度的度量。诊断的准确性并不是一个标记的固定属性。所有的准确性测量在不同的研究之间可能会有所不同,这不仅仅是偶然的,而且还会随着目标条件的定义、疾病的范围、环境和先前测试的数量的变化而变化。我们讨论了似然比是表达生物标志物准确性的一种优越方式这一说法的相关性,并为使用有时被降级的统计敏感性和特异性辩护。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信