Estimating the polychoric correlation from misclassified data

Multiple test procedures of disease prevalence based on stratified partially validated series in the presence of a gold standard

This paper discusses the problem of disease prevalence in clinical studies, focusing on multiple comparisons based on stratified partially validated series in the presence of a gold standard. Five test statistics, including two Wald-type test statistics, the inverse hyperbolic tangent transformation test statistic, likelihood ratio test statistic, and score test statistic, are proposed to conduct multiple comparisons. To control the overall type I error rate, several adjustment procedures are developed, namely the Bonferroni, Single-step adjusted MaxT, Single-step adjusted MinP, Holm's Step-down, and Hochberg's step-up procedures, based on these test statistics. The performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through simulation studies in terms of the empirical type I error rate and empirical power. Simulation results show that the Single-step adjusted MaxT procedure and Single-step adjusted MinP procedure generally outperform the other three procedures, and these two test procedures based on all test statistics have satisfactory performance. Notably, the Single-step adjusted MinP procedure tends to exhibit higher empirical power than the Single-step adjusted MaxT procedure. Furthermore, the Step-down and Step-up procedures show greater power compared to the Bonferroni method. The study also observes that as the validated ratio increases, the empirical type I errors of all test procedures approach the nominal level while maintaining higher power. Two real examples are presented to illustrate the proposed methods.

Confidence interval construction for proportion difference from partially validated series with two fallible classifiers

This article investigates the confidence interval (CI) construction of proportion difference for two independent partially validated series under the double-sampling scheme in which both classifiers are fallible. Several CIs based on the variance estimates recovery method of combining confidence limits from asymptotic, bootstrap, and Bayesian methods for two independent binomial proportions are developed under two models. Simulation results show that all CIs except for the bootstrap percentile-t CI and Bayesian credible interval with uniform prior under the independence model and all CIs under the dependence model generally perform well and are recommended. Two examples are used to illustrate the methodologies.

Homogeneity testing for binomial proportions under stratified double-sampling scheme with two fallible classifiers

This article investigates the homogeneity testing problem of binomial proportions for stratified partially validated data obtained by double-sampling method with two fallible classifiers. Several test procedures, including the weighted-least-squares test with/without log-transformation, logit-transformation and double log-transformation, and likelihood ratio test and score test, are developed to test the homogeneity under two models, distinguished by conditional independence assumption of two classifiers. Simulation results show that score test performs better than other tests in the sense that the empirical size is generally controlled around the nominal level, and hence be recommended to practical applications. Other tests also perform well when both binomial proportions and sample sizes are not small. Approximate sample sizes based on score test, likelihood ratio test and the weighted-least-squares test with double log-transformation are generally accurate in terms of the empirical power and type I error rate with the estimated sample sizes, and hence be recommended. An example from the malaria study is illustrated by the proposed methodologies.

Noninferiority testing for matched-pair ordinal data with misclassification

New treatments that are noninferior or equivalent to-but not necessarily superior to-the reference treatment may still be beneficial to patients because they have fewer side effects, are more convenient, take less time, or cost less. The noninferiority test is widely used in medical research to provide guidance in such situation. In addition, categorical variables are frequently encountered in medical research, such as in studies involving patient-reported outcomes. In this paper, we develop a noninferiority testing procedure for correlated ordinal categorical variables based on a paired design with a latent normal distribution approach. Misclassification is frequently encountered in the collection of ordinal categorical data; therefore, we further extend the procedure to account for misclassification using information in the partially validated data. Simulation studies are conducted to investigate the accuracy of the estimates, the type I error rates, and the power of the proposed procedure. Finally, we analyze one substantive example to demonstrate the utility of the proposed approach.

Clustered data analysis under miscategorized ordinal outcomes and missing covariates

The primary objective in this article is to look into the analysis of clustered ordinal model where complete information on one or more covariates cease to occur. In addition, we also focus on the analysis of miscategorized data that occur in many situations as outcomes are often classified into a category that does not truly reflect its actual state. A general model structure is assumed to accommodate the information that is obtained via surrogate variables. The theoretical motivation actually developed while encountering an orthodontic data to investigate the effects of age, sex and food habit on the extent of plaque deposit. The model we propose is quite flexible and is capable of tackling those additional noises like miscategorization and missingness, which occur in the data most frequently. A new two-step approach has been proposed to estimate the parameters of model framed. A rigorous simulation study has also been carried out to justify the validity of the model taken up for analysis. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Confidence intervals for proportion difference from two independent partially validated series

Partially validated series are common when a gold-standard test is too expensive to be applied to all subjects, and hence a fallible device is used accordingly to measure the presence of a characteristic of interest. In this article, confidence interval construction for proportion difference between two independent partially validated series is studied. Ten confidence intervals based on the method of variance estimates recovery (MOVER) are proposed, with each using the confidence limits for the two independent binomial proportions obtained by the asymptotic, Logit-transformation, Agresti–Coull and Bayesian methods. The performances of the proposed confidence intervals and three likelihood-based intervals available in the literature are compared with respect to the empirical coverage probability, confidence width and ratio of mesial non-coverage to non-coverage probability. Our empirical results show that (1) all confidence intervals exhibit good performance in large samples; (2) confidence intervals based on MOVER combining the confidence limits for binomial proportions based on Wilson, Agresti–Coull, Logit-transformation, Bayesian (with three priors) methods perform satisfactorily from small to large samples, and hence can be recommended for practical applications. Two real data sets are analysed to illustrate the proposed methods.

Sample size determination for disease prevalence studies with partially validated data

Summary

Disease prevalence is an important topic in medical research, and its study is based on data that are obtained by classifying subjects according to whether a disease has been contracted. Classification can be conducted with high-cost gold standard tests or low-cost screening tests, but the latter are subject to the misclassification of subjects. As a compromise between the two, many research studies use partially validated datasets in which all data points are classified by fallible tests, and some of the data points are validated in the sense that they are also classified by the completely accurate gold-standard test. In this article, we investigate the determination of sample sizes for disease prevalence studies with partially validated data. We use two approaches. The first is to find sample sizes that can achieve a pre-specified power of a statistical test at a chosen significance level, and the second is to find sample sizes that can control the width of a confidence interval with a pre-specified confidence level. Empirical studies have been conducted to demonstrate the performance of various testing procedures with the proposed sample sizes. The applicability of the proposed methods are illustrated by a real-data example.

Analysis of ordinal categorical data with misclassification

We develop a method for the analysis of multivariate ordinal categorical data with misclassification based on the latent normal variable approach. Misclassification arises if a subject has been classified into a category that does not truly reflect its actual state, and can occur with one or more variables. A basic framework is developed to enable the analysis of two types of data. The first corresponds to a single sample that is obtained from a fallible design that may lead to misclassified data. The other corresponds to data that is obtained by double sampling. Double sampling data consists of two parts: a sample that is obtained by classifying subjects using the fallible design only and a sample that is obtained by classifying subjects using both fallible and true designs, which is assumed to have no misclassification. A unified expectation-maximization approach is developed to find the maximum likelihood estimate of model parameters. Simulation studies and examples that are based on real data are used to demonstrate the applicability and practicability of the proposed methods.