Sample size calculation should be performed for design accuracy in diagnostic test studies

被引:343
作者
Flahault, A [1 ]
Cadilhac, M
Thomas, G
机构
[1] Hop Tenon, Unite Biostat & Informat Med, F-75970 Paris, France
[2] Univ Paris 06, INSERM, Unite 707, F-75571 Paris, France
关键词
sensitivity; specificity; sample size; binomial distribution; diagnostic test;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.12.009
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objectives: Guidelines for conducting studies and reading medical literature on diagnostic tests have been published: Requirements for the selection of cases and controls, and for ensuring a correct reference standard are now clarified. Our objective was to provide tables for sample size determination in this context. Study Design and Setting: In the usual situation, where the prevalence Prev of the disease of interest is < 0.50, one first determines the minimal number N-cases of cases required to ensure a given precision of the sensitivity estimate. Computations are based on the binomial distribution, for user-specified type I and type II error levels. The minimal number N-controls, of controls is then derived so as to allow for representativeness of the study population, according to N-controls = N-cases [(1 - Prev)/Prev]. Results: Tables give the values of N-cases corresponding to expected sensitivities from 0.60 to 0.99, acceptable lower 95% confidence limits from 0.50 to 0.98, and 5% probability of the estimated lower confidence limit being lower than the acceptable level. Conclusion: When designing diagnostic test studies, sample size calculations should be performed in order to guarantee the design accuracy. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:859 / 862
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A sample size calculation for spontaneous abortion in observational studies
    Xu, Ronghui
    Chambers, Christina
    REPRODUCTIVE TOXICOLOGY, 2011, 32 (04) : 490 - 493
  • [32] Heterogeneity in Systematic Reviews of Medical Imaging Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies
    White, Samuel J.
    Phua, Qi Sheng
    Lu, Lucy
    Yaxley, Kaspar L.
    Mcinnes, Matthew D. F.
    To, Minh-Son
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2024, 7 (02) : E240649
  • [33] Improvement of Sample Size Calculations for Binary Diagnostic Test Assessment
    Bailly, Sebastien
    Dupont, Cyrielle
    Iwaz, Jean
    Bossard, Nadine
    Rabilloud, Muriel
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2014, 62 (04) : 687 - 689
  • [34] Understanding the Direction of Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Test Accuracy
    Kohn, Michael A.
    Carpenter, Christopher R.
    Newman, Thomas B.
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2013, 20 (11) : 1194 - 1206
  • [35] Comparison and validation of metadta for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies
    Nyaga, Victoria N.
    Arbyn, Marc
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2023, 14 (03) : 544 - 562
  • [37] Modelling multiple thresholds in meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies
    Steinhauser, Susanne
    Schumacher, Martin
    Ruecker, Gerta
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2016, 16
  • [38] A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies
    Whiting, Penny F.
    Rutjes, Anne W. S.
    Westwood, Marie E.
    Mallett, Susan
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (10) : 1093 - 1104
  • [39] Sample size calculation for the Power Model for dose proportionality studies
    Sethuraman, Venkat S.
    Leonov, Sergei
    Squassante, Lisa
    Mitchell, Toni R.
    Hale, Michael D.
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2007, 6 (01) : 35 - 41
  • [40] Sample Size Calculation in Genetic Association Studies: A Practical Approach
    Politi, Cristina
    Roumeliotis, Stefanos
    Tripepi, Giovanni
    Spoto, Belinda
    LIFE-BASEL, 2023, 13 (01):