Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Southeast University, 87 Ding Jiaqiao Rd., Nanjing 210009, China.
Biomed Res Int. 2019 Aug 21;2019:1374748. doi: 10.1155/2019/1374748. eCollection 2019.
The Bayesian model plays an important role in diagnostic test evaluation in the absence of the gold standard, which used the external prior distribution of a parameter combined with sample data to yield the posterior distribution of the test characteristics. However, the correlation between diagnostic tests has always been a problem that cannot be ignored in the Bayesian model evaluation. This study will discuss how different Bayesian model, correlation scenarios, and prior distribution affect the outcome.
The data analyzed in this study was gathered during studies of patients presenting to the Nanjing Chest Hospital with suspected tuberculosis. The diagnostic character of T-SPOT.Tb and KD38 tuberculosis antibody test were evaluated in different Bayesian model, and discharge diagnosis as a gold standard was used to verify the model results in the end.
The comparison of four models under the conditional independence situation found that Bayesian probabilistic constraint model was consistent with the Conditional Covariance Bayesian model. The results were mainly affected by prior information. The sensitivity and specificity of the two tests in Conditional Covariance Bayesian model in prior constraint situation were considerably higher than the Bayesian probabilistic constraint model in prior constraint situation. The results of the four models under the conditional dependence situation were similar to the conditional independence situation; p was also negative with no prior constraint situation in both model Bayesian probabilistic constraint model and Conditional Covariance Bayesian model. The Deviance Information Criterion of Bayesian probabilistic constraint model was close to model Conditional Covariance Bayesian model, but p of Conditional Covariance Bayesian model in Prior constraint situation (p=2.40) was higher than the Bayesian probabilistic constraint model in Prior constraint situation (p=1.66).
The result of Conditional Covariance Bayesian model in prior constraint with conditional independence situation was closest to the result of gold standard evaluation in our data. Both of the two Bayesian methods are the feasible way for the evaluation of diagnostic test in the absence of the gold standard diagnostic. Prior source, priority number, and conditional dependencies should be considered in the method selection, the accuracy of posterior estimation mainly depending on the prior distribution.
贝叶斯模型在缺乏金标准的情况下对诊断测试评估起着重要作用,它使用参数的外部先验分布与样本数据相结合,得出测试特征的后验分布。然而,诊断测试之间的相关性一直是贝叶斯模型评估中不可忽视的问题。本研究将讨论不同的贝叶斯模型、相关场景和先验分布如何影响结果。
本研究分析的数据来自南京胸科医院疑似结核病患者的研究。采用不同的贝叶斯模型评价 T-SPOT.Tb 和 KD38 结核抗体检测的诊断特征,并以出院诊断作为金标准验证模型结果。
在条件独立情况下,四种模型的比较发现,贝叶斯概率约束模型与条件协方差贝叶斯模型一致。结果主要受先验信息的影响。在条件协方差贝叶斯模型的先验约束情况下,两种检测方法的灵敏度和特异性明显高于先验约束情况下的贝叶斯概率约束模型。在条件相关情况下,四个模型的结果与条件独立情况相似;在两种贝叶斯模型,即贝叶斯概率约束模型和条件协方差贝叶斯模型中,p 均为负值且无先验约束情况。贝叶斯概率约束模型的偏差信息准则接近模型条件协方差贝叶斯模型,但条件协方差贝叶斯模型的先验约束情况下的 p 值(p=2.40)高于贝叶斯概率约束模型的先验约束情况下的 p 值(p=1.66)。
在我们的数据中,条件独立情况下的条件协方差贝叶斯模型的先验约束结果与金标准评估结果最接近。这两种贝叶斯方法都是缺乏金标准诊断的诊断测试评估的可行方法。在方法选择时应考虑先验来源、优先级和条件依赖关系,后验估计的准确性主要取决于先验分布。