Measuring agreement in method comparison studies
- PMID: 10501650
- DOI: 10.1177/096228029900800204
Measuring agreement in method comparison studies
Abstract
Agreement between two methods of clinical measurement can be quantified using the differences between observations made using the two methods on the same subjects. The 95% limits of agreement, estimated by mean difference +/- 1.96 standard deviation of the differences, provide an interval within which 95% of differences between measurements by the two methods are expected to lie. We describe how graphical methods can be used to investigate the assumptions of the method and we also give confidence intervals. We extend the basic approach to data where there is a relationship between difference and magnitude, both with a simple logarithmic transformation approach and a new, more general, regression approach. We discuss the importance of the repeatability of each method separately and compare an estimate of this to the limits of agreement. We extend the limits of agreement approach to data with repeated measurements, proposing new estimates for equal numbers of replicates by each method on each subject, for unequal numbers of replicates, and for replicated data collected in pairs, where the underlying value of the quantity being measured is changing. Finally, we describe a nonparametric approach to comparing methods.
Comment in
-
Statistical methods in laboratory medicine.Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):91. doi: 10.1177/096228029900800201. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999. PMID: 10501647 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(4):571-82. doi: 10.1080/10543400701329422. J Biopharm Stat. 2007. PMID: 17613642
-
Modelling method comparison data.Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):161-79. doi: 10.1177/096228029900800205. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999. PMID: 10501651 Review.
-
Calculating reference intervals for laboratory measurements.Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):93-112. doi: 10.1177/096228029900800202. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999. PMID: 10501648 Review.
-
Demystifying EQA statistics and reports.Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2017 Feb 15;27(1):37-48. doi: 10.11613/BM.2017.006. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2017. PMID: 28392725 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Statistical methods in laboratory medicine.Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):91. doi: 10.1177/096228029900800201. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999. PMID: 10501647 No abstract available.
Cited by
-
Reproducibility and repeatability of a new computerized software for sagittal spinopelvic and scoliosis curvature radiologic measurements: Keops(®).Eur Spine J. 2015 Jul;24(7):1574-81. doi: 10.1007/s00586-015-3817-1. Epub 2015 Feb 28. Eur Spine J. 2015. PMID: 25724685
-
The reliability and relative validity of a diet index score for 4-11-year-old children derived from a parent-reported short food survey.Public Health Nutr. 2014 Jul;17(7):1486-97. doi: 10.1017/S1368980013001778. Epub 2013 Jul 5. Public Health Nutr. 2014. PMID: 23830074 Free PMC article.
-
Validation of deep learning-based markerless 3D pose estimation.PLoS One. 2022 Oct 20;17(10):e0276258. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276258. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 36264853 Free PMC article.
-
Microarray Normalization Revisited for Reproducible Breast Cancer Biomarkers.Biomed Res Int. 2020 Aug 6;2020:1363827. doi: 10.1155/2020/1363827. eCollection 2020. Biomed Res Int. 2020. PMID: 32832541 Free PMC article.
-
Concordance Between Blood Pressure in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial and in Routine Clinical Practice.JAMA Intern Med. 2020 Dec 1;180(12):1655-1663. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.5028. JAMA Intern Med. 2020. PMID: 33044494 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical