Department of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.
Stat Med. 2009 Dec 10;28(28):3523-38. doi: 10.1002/sim.3656.
Measurement error is pervasive in medical research. In periodontal research studies, one measure of disease status is the probed pocket depth (PPD), the depth of the space between a tooth and the surrounding gum. In larger studies, these assessments are made by multiple examiners, each having distinct measurement error characteristics. Because PPD is recorded in whole millimeters, it may be regarded as discrete and its associated error as misclassification error. This study investigates the impact of this measurement error when evaluating the effect of periodontal disease status on levels of inflammatory markers in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). The marker readings are either left or right censored, due to quantities that are either too small to be reliably quantified or so large that they saturate the detector. Additionally, marker readings from multiple periodontal sites within a subject's mouth are correlated. These considerations give rise to a clustered survival model for the marker readings in which the discrete predictor of interest is misclassified. Associations between the GCF markers and periodontal assessments are corrected for misclassification error using the MC-SIMEX method. Simulation studies reveal the impact of varying degrees of misclassification error on associations of interest. Analysis of pilot data from a periodontal study, for which examiner misclassification rates are estimated from calibration studies, further illustrates the approach.
在医学研究中,测量误差普遍存在。在牙周病研究中,疾病状况的一个衡量标准是探诊牙周袋深度(PPD),即牙齿和周围牙龈之间的空间深度。在较大的研究中,这些评估由多个检查者进行,每个检查者都有不同的测量误差特征。由于 PPD 以毫米为单位记录,因此它可能被视为离散的,其相关误差可被视为分类错误。本研究探讨了在评估牙周病状况对龈沟液(GCF)中炎症标志物水平的影响时,这种测量误差的影响。由于数量太小而无法可靠量化或太大而使探测器饱和,因此标记读数会出现左或右删失。此外,来自受试者口腔内多个牙周部位的标记读数是相关的。这些考虑因素导致了一个聚类生存模型,其中离散的感兴趣预测因子被分类错误。使用 MC-SIMEX 方法,通过分类错误校正,对 GCF 标志物和牙周评估之间的关联进行校正。模拟研究揭示了不同程度的分类错误对感兴趣关联的影响。来自牙周病研究的试点数据的分析进一步说明了这种方法,其中检查者分类错误率是从校准研究中估计的。