IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lstaxx/v52y2023i14p5010-5025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Medical diagnostics accuracy measures and cut-point selection: an innovative approach based on relative net benefit

Author

Listed:
  • Hani Samawi
  • Ding-Geng Chen
  • Ferdous Ahmed
  • Jing Kersey

Abstract

The evaluation of diagnostics tests based on net benefit involves both the accuracy of the tests and the clinical consequences of the diagnostic errors. Also, the benefit-risk measures approach depends on the prevalence of the underlying disease. However, for some diseases or clinical conditions, the prevalence is either unknown or different from region to region or population to population, resulting in an erroneous diagnosis. This paper introduces innovative post-test diagnostic accuracy measures and a new cut-point selection criterion based on the expected relative net benefit. Our approach does not depend on the disease’s prevalence, maximizing net benefit and reducing the clinical consequences of the diagnostic errors. We demonstrate the advantages of the proposed measures to compare different diagnostic tests and/or biomarkers, on average, the abilities for rule-in, rule-out clinical condition, and as cut-point selection criterion that maximize the expected relative net benefit diagnostic accuracy. Numerical examples, simulation studies, and real data are provided to illustrate the superiority and applicability of the proposed measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Hani Samawi & Ding-Geng Chen & Ferdous Ahmed & Jing Kersey, 2023. "Medical diagnostics accuracy measures and cut-point selection: an innovative approach based on relative net benefit," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(14), pages 5010-5025, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:lstaxx:v:52:y:2023:i:14:p:5010-5025
    DOI: 10.1080/03610926.2021.2001016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03610926.2021.2001016
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03610926.2021.2001016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    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:taf:lstaxx:v:52:y:2023:i:14:p:5010-5025. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lsta .

    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.