Mansournia Mohammad Ali, Waters Rachel, Nazemipour Maryam, Bland Martin, Altman Douglas G
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Glob Epidemiol. 2020 Dec 8;3:100045. doi: 10.1016/j.gloepi.2020.100045. eCollection 2021 Nov.
Introduced in 1983, Bland-Altman methods is now considered the standard approach for assessment of agreement between two methods of measurement. The method is widely used by researchers in various disciplines so that the Bland-Altman 1986 Lancet paper has been named as the 29th mostly highly cited paper ever, over all fields. However, two papers by Hopkins (2004) and Krouwer (2007) questioned the validity of the Bland-Altman analysis. We review the points of critical papers and provide responses to them. The discussions in the critical papers of the Bland-Altman method are scientifically delusive. Hopkins misused the Bland-Altman methodology for research question of model validation and also incorrectly used least-square regression when there is measurement error in the predictor. The problem with Krouwers' paper is making sweeping generalisation of a very narrow and somewhat unrealistic situation. The method proposed by Bland and Altman should be used when the research question is method comparison.
布兰德-奥特曼方法于1983年被引入,如今被视为评估两种测量方法之间一致性的标准方法。该方法被各学科的研究人员广泛使用,以至于布兰德和奥特曼1986年发表在《柳叶刀》上的论文被评为所有领域中被引用次数第29多的论文。然而,霍普金斯(2004年)和克鲁韦尔(2007年)的两篇论文对布兰德-奥特曼分析的有效性提出了质疑。我们回顾了批评性论文的要点并给出回应。关于布兰德-奥特曼方法的批评性论文中的讨论在科学上具有误导性。霍普金斯在模型验证的研究问题中滥用了布兰德-奥特曼方法,并且在预测变量存在测量误差时错误地使用了最小二乘回归。克鲁韦尔论文的问题在于对一种非常狭隘且有些不切实际的情况进行了一概而论。当研究问题是方法比较时,应使用布兰德和奥特曼提出的方法。