通过 ROC 曲线下面积比较 k$$ k$$ 不同疗法的疗效

Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1002/sta4.672
Pablo Martínez‐Camblor, Sonia Pérez‐Fernández, Lucas L. Dwiel, Wilder T. Doucette
{"title":"通过 ROC 曲线下面积比较 k$$ k$$ 不同疗法的疗效","authors":"Pablo Martínez‐Camblor, Sonia Pérez‐Fernández, Lucas L. Dwiel, Wilder T. Doucette","doi":"10.1002/sta4.672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve (AUC) has become a popular index not only for measuring the overall prediction capacity of a marker but also the strength of the association between continuous and binary variables. In the current considered study, the AUC was used for comparing the association size of four different interventions involving impulsive decision making, studied through an animal model, in which each animal provides several negative (pretreatment) and positive (posttreatment) measures. The problem of the full comparison of the average AUCs arises therefore in a natural way. We construct an analysis of variance (ANOVA) type test for testing the equality of the impact of these treatments measured through the respective AUCs and considering the random‐effect represented by the animal. The use (and development) of a post hoc Tukey's HSD‐type test is also considered. We explore the finite‐sample behaviour of our proposal via Monte Carlo simulations, and analyse the data generated from the original problem. An R package implementing the procedures is provided in the supporting information.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the effectiveness of k$$ k $$‐different treatments through the area under the ROC curve\",\"authors\":\"Pablo Martínez‐Camblor, Sonia Pérez‐Fernández, Lucas L. Dwiel, Wilder T. Doucette\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/sta4.672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve (AUC) has become a popular index not only for measuring the overall prediction capacity of a marker but also the strength of the association between continuous and binary variables. In the current considered study, the AUC was used for comparing the association size of four different interventions involving impulsive decision making, studied through an animal model, in which each animal provides several negative (pretreatment) and positive (posttreatment) measures. The problem of the full comparison of the average AUCs arises therefore in a natural way. We construct an analysis of variance (ANOVA) type test for testing the equality of the impact of these treatments measured through the respective AUCs and considering the random‐effect represented by the animal. The use (and development) of a post hoc Tukey's HSD‐type test is also considered. We explore the finite‐sample behaviour of our proposal via Monte Carlo simulations, and analyse the data generated from the original problem. An R package implementing the procedures is provided in the supporting information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/sta4.672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sta4.672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

受体运行特征曲线下面积(AUC)已成为一种流行的指标,不仅可用于衡量标记物的整体预测能力,还可用于衡量连续变量和二元变量之间的关联强度。在目前的研究中,AUC 被用于比较四种不同干预措施的关联大小,这些干预措施涉及冲动决策,通过动物模型进行研究,其中每只动物都提供了几种消极(治疗前)和积极(治疗后)的测量指标。因此,全面比较平均 AUC 的问题自然而然就出现了。我们构建了一个方差分析(ANOVA)类型的测试,通过各自的 AUCs 值来测试这些治疗方法的影响是否相同,并考虑到动物所代表的随机效应。我们还考虑了事后 Tukey's HSD 类型检验的使用(和开发)。我们通过蒙特卡罗模拟探索了我们建议的有限样本行为,并分析了原始问题产生的数据。辅助信息中提供了一个实现这些程序的 R 软件包。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Comparing the effectiveness of k$$ k $$‐different treatments through the area under the ROC curve
The area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve (AUC) has become a popular index not only for measuring the overall prediction capacity of a marker but also the strength of the association between continuous and binary variables. In the current considered study, the AUC was used for comparing the association size of four different interventions involving impulsive decision making, studied through an animal model, in which each animal provides several negative (pretreatment) and positive (posttreatment) measures. The problem of the full comparison of the average AUCs arises therefore in a natural way. We construct an analysis of variance (ANOVA) type test for testing the equality of the impact of these treatments measured through the respective AUCs and considering the random‐effect represented by the animal. The use (and development) of a post hoc Tukey's HSD‐type test is also considered. We explore the finite‐sample behaviour of our proposal via Monte Carlo simulations, and analyse the data generated from the original problem. An R package implementing the procedures is provided in the supporting information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
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