Volume 34, Issue 29
Research Article

A mixed effect model for bivariate meta‐analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies using a copula representation of the random effects distribution

Aristidis K. Nikoloulopoulos

Corresponding Author

School of Computing Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, U.K.

Correspondence to: Aristidis K. Nikoloulopoulos, School of Computing Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, U.K.

E‐email: a.nikoloulopoulos@uea.ac.uk

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 02 August 2015
Citations: 18

Abstract

Diagnostic test accuracy studies typically report the number of true positives, false positives, true negatives and false negatives. There usually exists a negative association between the number of true positives and true negatives, because studies that adopt less stringent criterion for declaring a test positive invoke higher sensitivities and lower specificities. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) is currently recommended to synthesize diagnostic test accuracy studies. We propose a copula mixed model for bivariate meta‐analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. Our general model includes the GLMM as a special case and can also operate on the original scale of sensitivity and specificity. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves are deduced for the proposed model through quantile regression techniques and different characterizations of the bivariate random effects distribution. Our general methodology is demonstrated with an extensive simulation study and illustrated by re‐analysing the data of two published meta‐analyses. Our study suggests that there can be an improvement on GLMM in fit to data and makes the argument for moving to copula random effects models. Our modelling framework is implemented in the package CopulaREMADA within the open source statistical environment R. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 18

  • A pseudo-likelihood approach for multivariate meta-analysis of test accuracy studies with multiple thresholds, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280220948085, (096228022094808), (2020).
  • A multinomial quadrivariate D-vine copula mixed model for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies in the presence of non-evaluable subjects, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280220913898, (096228022091389), (2020).
  • Analysis of paediatric visual acuity using Bayesian copula models with sinh‐arcsinh marginal densities, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.8176, 38, 18, (3421-3443), (2019).
  • Bivariate beta-binomial model using Gaussian copula for bivariate meta-analysis of two binary outcomes with low incidence, Japanese Journal of Statistics and Data Science, 10.1007/s42081-019-00037-z, (2019).
  • Statistical methods for detecting outlying and influential studies in meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280219852747, (096228021985274), (2019).
  • A population‐averaged approach to diagnostic test meta‐analysis, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201700187, 61, 1, (126-137), (2018).
  • COUPLING COUPLES WITH COPULAS: ANALYSIS OF ASSORTATIVE MATCHING ON RISK ATTITUDE, Economic Inquiry, 10.1111/ecin.12726, 57, 1, (654-666), (2018).
  • Clinical utility of microRNA-451 as diagnostic biomarker for human cancers, Bioscience Reports, 10.1042/BSR20180653, 39, 1, (BSR20180653), (2018).
  • When should meta‐analysis avoid making hidden normality assumptions?, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201800071, 60, 6, (1040-1058), (2018).
  • Assessing Lung Cancer Screening Programs under Uncertainty in a Heterogeneous Population, Value in Health, 10.1016/j.jval.2018.01.021, 21, 11, (1269-1277), (2018).
  • Statistical adjustment of culture-independent diagnostic tests for trend analysis in the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet), USA, International Journal of Epidemiology, 10.1093/ije/dyy041, (2018).
  • A D-vine copula mixed model for joint meta-analysis and comparison of diagnostic tests, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280218796685, (096228021879668), (2018).
  • On composite likelihood in bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies, AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, 10.1007/s10182-017-0299-y, 102, 2, (211-227), (2017).
  • Meta‐analysis for the comparison of two diagnostic tests—A new approach based on copulas, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7556, 37, 5, (739-748), (2017).
  • A double SIMEX approach for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10.1186/s12874-016-0284-2, 17, 1, (2017).
  • Beta-binomial analysis of variance model for network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy data, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280216682532, 27, 8, (2554-2566), (2016).
  • Hybrid copula mixed models for combining case-control and cohort studies in meta-analysis of diagnostic tests, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280216682376, 27, 8, (2540-2553), (2016).
  • A vine copula mixed effect model for trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280215596769, 26, 5, (2270-2286), (2015).

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.