Nearest-Neighbor Estimation for ROC Analysis under Verification Bias

Adimari Gianfranco () and Chiogna Monica ()
Additional contact information
Adimari Gianfranco: Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Padova, Via C. Battisti 241, Padova 35121, Italy
Chiogna Monica: Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Padova, Via C. Battisti 241, Padova 35121, Italy

The International Journal of Biostatistics, 2015, vol. 11, issue 1, 109-124

Abstract: For a continuous-scale diagnostic test, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve is a popular tool for displaying the ability of the test to discriminate between healthy and diseased subjects. In some studies, verification of the true disease status is performed only for a subset of subjects, possibly depending on the test result and other characteristics of the subjects. Estimators of the ROC curve based only on this subset of subjects are typically biased; this is known as verification bias. Methods have been proposed to correct verification bias, in particular under the assumption that the true disease status, if missing, is missing at random (MAR). MAR assumption means that the probability of missingness depends on the true disease status only through the test result and observed covariate information. However, the existing methods require parametric models for the (conditional) probability of disease and/or the (conditional) probability of verification, and hence are subject to model misspecification: a wrong specification of such parametric models can affect the behavior of the estimators, which can be inconsistent. To avoid misspecification problems, in this paper we propose a fully nonparametric method for the estimation of the ROC curve of a continuous test under verification bias. The method is based on nearest-neighbor imputation and adopts generic smooth regression models for both the probability that a subject is diseased and the probability that it is verified. Simulation experiments and an illustrative example show the usefulness of the new method. Variance estimation is also discussed.

Keywords: diagnostic tests; missing data imputation; sensitivity; specificity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2014-0014 (text/html)
For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:11:y:2015:i:1:p:109-124:n:4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/ijb/html

DOI: 10.1515/ijb-2014-0014

Access Statistics for this article

The International Journal of Biostatistics is currently edited by Antoine Chambaz, Alan E. Hubbard and Mark J. van der Laan

More articles in The International Journal of Biostatistics from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().