A Comparison of Parametric and Nonparametric Approaches to ROC Analysis of Quantitative Diagnostic Tests

Karim O. Hajian-Tilaki, James A. Hanley, Lawrence Joseph and Jean-Paul Collet

Medical Decision Making, 1997, vol. 17, issue 1, 94-102

Abstract: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, which yields indices of accuracy such as the area under the curve (AUC), is increasingly being used to evaluate the performances of diagnostic tests that produce results on continuous scales. Both par ametric and nonparametric ROC approaches are available to assess the discriminant capacity of such tests, but there are no clear guidelines as to the merits of each, particularly with non-binormal data. Investigators may worry that when data are non- Gaussian, estimates of diagnostic accuracy based on a binormal model may be dis torted. The authors conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to compare the bias and sampling variability in the estimates of the AUCs derived from parametric and nonparametric procedures. Each approach was assessed in data sets generated from various configurations of pairs of overlapping distributions; these included the binormal model and non-binormal pairs of distributions where one or both pair members were mixtures of Gaussian (MG) distributions with different degrees of departures from bi- normality. The biases in the estimates of the AUCs were found to be very small for both parametric and nonparametric procedures. The two approaches yielded very close estimates of the AUCs and of the corresponding sampling variability even when data were generated from non-binormal models. Thus, for a wide range of distributions, concern about bias or imprecision of the estimates of the AUC should not be a major factor in choosing between the nonparametric and parametric approaches. Key words: ROC analysis; quantitative diagnostic test; comparison, parametric; binormal model; LABROC; nonparametric procedure; area under the curve (AUC). (Med Decis Making 1997;17:94-102)

Date: 1997
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9701700111 (text/html)

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:sae:medema:v:17:y:1997:i:1:p:94-102

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9701700111

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().