IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v51y2006i2p601-611.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimators of sensitivity and specificity in the presence of verification bias: A Bayesian approach

Author

Listed:
  • Martinez, Edson Zangiacomi
  • Alberto Achcar, Jorge
  • Louzada-Neto, Francisco

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Martinez, Edson Zangiacomi & Alberto Achcar, Jorge & Louzada-Neto, Francisco, 2006. "Estimators of sensitivity and specificity in the presence of verification bias: A Bayesian approach," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 601-611, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:51:y:2006:i:2:p:601-611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(06)00004-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrzej S. Kosinski & Huiman X. Barnhart, 2003. "Accounting for Nonignorable Verification Bias in Assessment of Diagnostic Tests," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 59(1), pages 163-171, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chinyereugo M Umemneku Chikere & Kevin Wilson & Sara Graziadio & Luke Vale & A Joy Allen, 2019. "Diagnostic test evaluation methodology: A systematic review of methods employed to evaluate diagnostic tests in the absence of gold standard – An update," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Danping Liu & Xiao-Hua Zhou, 2013. "Covariate Adjustment in Estimating the Area Under ROC Curve with Partially Missing Gold Standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 91-100, March.
    2. Frederico Z. Poleto & Julio M. Singer & Carlos Daniel Paulino, 2011. "Comparing diagnostic tests with missing data," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 1207-1222, April.
    3. Selin Merdan & Christine L. Barnett & Brian T. Denton & James E. Montie & David C. Miller, 2021. "OR Practice–Data Analytics for Optimal Detection of Metastatic Prostate Cancer," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 774-794, May.
    4. Paul S. Albert, 2007. "Imputation Approaches for Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy for Multiple Tests from Partially Verified Designs," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(3), pages 947-957, September.
    5. Manuela Buzoianu & Joseph B. Kadane, 2009. "Optimal Bayesian Design for Patient Selection in a Clinical Study," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 953-961, September.
    6. Richard M. Golden & Steven S. Henley & Halbert White & T. Michael Kashner, 2019. "Consequences of Model Misspecification for Maximum Likelihood Estimation with Missing Data," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, September.
    7. Roldán Nofuentes, J.A. & Luna del Castillo, J.D. & Montero Alonso, M.A., 2009. "Determining sample size to evaluate and compare the accuracy of binary diagnostic tests in the presence of partial disease verification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 742-755, January.
    8. José Antonio Roldán-Nofuentes & Saad Bouh Regad, 2021. "Estimation of the Average Kappa Coefficient of a Binary Diagnostic Test in the Presence of Partial Verification," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    9. Danping Liu & Xiao-Hua Zhou, 2010. "A Model for Adjusting for Nonignorable Verification Bias in Estimation of the ROC Curve and Its Area with Likelihood-Based Approach," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 1119-1128, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:51:y:2006:i:2:p:601-611. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.