|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Statistical Methods in Medical Research, Vol. 15, No. 6,
571-584 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0962280206070637
A solution for the most basic optimization problem associated with an ROC curve
Chap T Le
Division of Biostatistics and Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, MMC 303, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA, chap{at}biostat.umn.edu
In a few cases, such as early pregnancy tests, the test results are dichotomous; many diagnostic tests, however, give results which are not binary. In the diagnosis of prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen test result is on a continuous scale; or, in radiology, assessment of mammograms is on an ordinal scale. In such cases, the accuracy of the marker or test is often first summarized in a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and then as the area under that curve. The area under the ROC curve, however, only shows the ‘potential’ of a marker; sooner or later, for practical uses, we still need to dichotomize the test result so that we can classify subjects as ‘diseased’ or ‘healthy’. Finding an ‘optimal’ cutpoint to dichotomize a continuous marker is desirable and is a very basic problem but, in all or most cases, cutpoints used in practice are arbitrary. The difficulty lies in our failure to define and justify a criterion for optimality. In this paper, we will propose a solution by maximizing a well-known parameter -the Youden’s Index -within the framework of the ROC curve.
References
- Miller RG, Efron B, Brown Jr BW, Moses LE. Biostatistics casebook. Wiley-Interscience , 1980; 3-18.
- Bamber D. The area above the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating characteristic graph . Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1975; 12: 387-415 .[CrossRef][ISI]
- Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve . Radiology 1982; 143: 29-36 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Begg CB. Advances in statistical methodology for diagnostic medicine in the 1980’s . Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10: 1887-1895 .[ISI][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests . Cancer 1950; 3: 32-35 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Gart JJ, Buck AA. Comparison of a screening test and a reference test in epidemiologic studies . American Journal of Epidemiology 1966; 83: 593-602 .[Free Full Text]
- Steck GB, Zimmer. Estimation of acceleration and ageing functions . Proceedings 1972 NATO conference on reliability evaluation and reliability testing, The Hague, Netherlands.
- Le CT. Evaluation of confounding effects in ROC studies . Biometrics 1997; 53: 998-1007 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Anderson KE, Carmella SG, Ye M, Bliss RL, Le C, Murphy L, Hecht SS. Metabolites of tobacco-specific lung carcinogen in nonsmoking women exposed to environmental smoke . Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2001; 93: 378-381 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Chou TC. Derivation and properties of Michaelis-Menten type and Hill type equations for reference ligands . Journal of Theoretical Biology 1976; 59: 233-276 .[CrossRef]
- Simpson AJ, Fritter MJ. What is the best index of detectability? Psychological Bulletin 1973; 80: 481-488 .[CrossRef][ISI]
- Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases . Radiology 1983; 148: 839-843 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach . Biometrics 1988; 44: 837-845 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Weiand S, Mitchell HG, James BR, James KL. A family of nonparametric statistics for comparing diagnostic markers with paired or unpaired data . Biometrics 1989; 76: 585-592 .[CrossRef]
- Newcombe RG. Simultaneous comparison of sensitivity and specificity of two tests in paired design: a straightforward graphical approach . Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20: 907-915 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- McNemar Q. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages . Psychometrika 1947; 17: 153-157 .
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
W. Palmas, T. G. Pickering, J. Teresi, J. E. Schwartz, L. Field, R. S. Weinstock, and S. Shea
Telemedicine Home Blood Pressure Measurements and Progression of Albuminuria in Elderly People With Diabetes
Hypertension,
May 1, 2008;
51(5):
1282 - 1288.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. M.G. Leeflang, K. G.M. Moons, J. B. Reitsma, and A. H. Zwinderman
Bias in Sensitivity and Specificity Caused by Data-Driven Selection of Optimal Cutoff Values: Mechanisms, Magnitude, and Solutions
Clin. Chem.,
April 1, 2008;
54(4):
729 - 737.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
