Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A heteroscedastic Bayesian model for method comparison data Cover
Open Access
|Jan 2023

References

  1. [1] ALTMAN, D.G., AND BLAND, J.M. 1983. Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. The Statistician. 32, 307-317.
  2. [2] ANDREW, G., CARLIN, J.B., STERN, H.S., et al. 2004. Bayesian Data Analysis, 2nd edition. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
  3. [3] ARAVIND, K.R., AND NAWARATHNA, L.S. 2017. A statistical method for assessing agreement between two methods of heteroscedastic clinical measurements using the copula method. J Med Stat Inform. 5:3. 10.7243/2053-7662-5-3
  4. [4] BILIĆ-ZULLE, L. 2011. Comparison of methods: Passing and Bablok regression. Biochemia Medica. 21(1):49-52. 10.11613/BM.2011.010.
  5. [5] BLAND, J.M., AND ALTMAN, D.G. 1986. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 307—310.
  6. [6] BLAND, J.M., AND ALTMAN, D.G. 1999. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 8(2): 135–160. 10.1177/096228029900800204.
  7. [7] BOSCARDIN, W.J., AND GELMAN, A. 1994. Bayesian Computation for Parametric Models of Heteroscedasticity in the Linear Model. In Advances in Econometrics. 11, A87-10.
  8. [8] BOSCARDIN, W.J., GELMAN, A. 1996. Bayesian Computation for parametric Models of Heteroscedasticity in the Linear Model. In Advances in Econometrics, Volume 11 (Part A), edited by Hill, R. C. Connecticut: JAI Press Inc.
  9. [9] CARSTENSEN, B. 2010. Comparing methods of measurement: Extending the LoA by regression. Statistics in Medicine. 29: 401-410. doi: 10.1002/sim.3769
  10. [10] CHINCHILLI, V.M., MARTEL, J.K., KUMANYIKA, S., AND LLOYD, T. 1996. A weighted concordance correlation coefficient for repeated measurement designs. Biometrics. 52:341–353.
  11. [11] CHOUDHARY, P.K., AND NAGARAJA, H.N. 2007. Tests for assessment of agreement using probability criteria. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference.137:279–290.
  12. [12] CHOUDHARY, P.K. 2009. Interrater agreement. In Methods and Applications of Statistics in the Life and Health Sciences, BALAKRISHNAN N et. al. (ed.). John Wiley: New York. 461–480.
  13. [13] CHOUDHARY, P.K., AND YIN, K. 2010. Bayesian and Frequentist Methodologies for Analyzing Method Comparison Studies With Multiple Methods. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research. 2:122-132. 10.1198/sbr.2010.08096.
  14. [14] DE WAAL, E.E., WAPPLER, F., AND BUHRE, W.F. 2009. Cardiac output monitoring. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 22: 71–7.
  15. [15] EDILBERTO, C., AND JORGE, A. 2009. Regression Models with Heteroscedasticity using Bayesian Approach. Revista Colombiana de Estadística.32
  16. [16] GALEA-ROJAS, M., DE CASTILHO, M.V., AND BOLFARINE, H., et al. 2003. Detection of analytical bias. Analyst. 128: 1073–1081.
  17. [17] GARDNER, M.J., AND ALTMAN, D.G. 1986. Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 292:746–50.
  18. [18] HANNEMAN, S.K. 2018. Design, analysis, and interpretation of method-comparison studies. AACN advanced critical care. 19(2): 223–234. 10.1097/01.AACN.0000318125.41512.a3.
  19. [19] KASS, R.E., AND WASSERMAN, L. 1996. The Selection of Prior Distributions by Formal Rules. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 91:435, 1343-1370.10.1080/01621459.1996.10477003
  20. [20] LIN, L., HEDAYAT, A.S., WU, W. 2007. A Unified Approach for Assessing Agreement for Continuous and Categorical Data. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 17:4, 629-652, DOI: 10.1080/10543400701376498
  21. [21] LIN, L. 1989. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 45:255–268. Corrections: 2000,56, 324–325.
  22. [22] LIN, L. 2000. Total deviation index for measuring individual agreement with applications in laboratory performance and bioequivalence. Statistics in Medicine. 19:255–270.
  23. [23] LIN, L.I., HEDAYAT, A.S., SINHA, B., AND YANG, M. 2002. Statistical methods in assessing agreement: models, issues, and tools. Journal of the American Statistical Association.97:257–270.
  24. [24] LINNET, K. 1998. Performance of Deming regression analysis in case of misspecified analytical error ratio in method comparison studies. Clinical Chemistry. 44(5):1024-1031.
  25. [25] MONTENIJ, L.J., BUHRE, W.F., JANSEN, J.R. et al. 2016. methodology of method comparison studies evaluating the validity of cardiac output monitors: a stepwise approach and checklist. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 116 (6): 750–8.
  26. [26] NAWARATHNA, L.S., CHOUDHARY, P.K. 2013. Measuring Agreement in Method Comparison Studies with Heteroscedastic Measurements. Statistics in Medicine. 32(29): 5156-5171. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5955
  27. [27] NAWARATHNA, L.S., CHOUDHARY, P. 2015. A heteroscedastic measurement error model for method comparison data with replicate measurements. Statistics in Medicine. 34(7), 1242-1258.
  28. [28] O’HAGAN, ANTHONY, FORSTER, et al 2004. Reading in Bayesian Inference. Volume 2b of Kendall’s Advanced Theory of Statistics, second edition. Arnold, London.
  29. [29] PETER, B. 2001. A Brief Introduction to Monte Carlo Simulation. Clinical pharmacokinetics.40: 15-22. 10.2165/00003088-200140010-00002.
  30. [30] PEYTON, P.J., AND CHONG, S.W. 2010. Minimally invasive measurement of cardiac output during surgery and critical care: a meta-analysis of accuracy and precision. Anesthesiology. 113:1220–35.
  31. [31] STUDENMUND, A.H. 1991. Reading using Econometrics: A practical guide.2nd Ed. ISBN 0-673-52125-7.
  32. [32] TIM, P.M., IAN, R.W., AND MICHAEL, J.C. 2019. Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods. Statistics in Medicine. 38:2074–2102. doi. 10.1002/sim.8086
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jamsi-2022-0012 | Journal eISSN: 1339-0015 | Journal ISSN: 1336-9180
Language: English
Page range: 57 - 75
Published on: Jan 19, 2023
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2023 S. M. M. Lakmali, L. S. Nawarathna, P. Wijekoon, published by University of Ss. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.