Comparison of concordance correlation coefficient and coefficient of individual agreement in assessing agreement
- PMID: 17613650
- DOI: 10.1080/10543400701329497
Comparison of concordance correlation coefficient and coefficient of individual agreement in assessing agreement
Abstract
In method comparison and reliability studies, it is often important to assess agreement between multiple measurements made by different methods, devices, laboratories, observers, or instruments. For continuous data, the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) is a popular index for assessing agreement between multiple methods on the same subject where none of the methods is treated as reference. Barnhart et al. (2007) proposed coefficient of individual agreement (CIA) to assess individual agreement between multiple methods for situations with and without a reference method extending the concept of individual bioe-quivalence from the FDA 2001 guidelines. In this paper, we propose a new CCC for assessing agreement between multiple methods where one of the methods is treated as reference. We compare the properties of the CCC and CIA and their dependency on the relative magnitude of between-subject variability and within-subject variability. The relationship between CCC and CIA as well as the impact of between-subject variability are presented algebraically and graphically. Several examples are presented to explain the interpretation of the CCC and CIA values.
Similar articles
-
Assessing individual agreement.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(4):697-719. doi: 10.1080/10543400701329489. J Biopharm Stat. 2007. PMID: 17613649
-
Resampling dependent concordance correlation coefficients.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(4):685-96. doi: 10.1080/10543400701329471. J Biopharm Stat. 2007. PMID: 17613648
-
A unified approach for assessing agreement for continuous and categorical data.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(4):629-52. doi: 10.1080/10543400701376498. J Biopharm Stat. 2007. PMID: 17613645
-
An overview on assessing agreement with continuous measurements.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(4):529-69. doi: 10.1080/10543400701376480. J Biopharm Stat. 2007. PMID: 17613641 Review.
-
Selected biostatistical aspects of the validation of in vitro toxicological assays.Altern Lab Anim. 2002 Dec;30 Suppl 2:93-8. doi: 10.1177/026119290203002S14. Altern Lab Anim. 2002. PMID: 12513657 Review.
Cited by
-
Quality Control and Validation of Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurements Taken During an Epidemiological Investigation.Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Sep;94(37):e1475. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001475. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015. PMID: 26376388 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume.Radiology. 2009 Aug;252(2):449-57. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2523081423. Radiology. 2009. PMID: 19703883 Free PMC article.
-
Comparing a Fitbit Wearable to an Electrocardiogram Gold Standard as a Measure of Heart Rate Under Psychological Stress: A Validation Study.JMIR Form Res. 2022 Dec 21;6(12):e37885. doi: 10.2196/37885. JMIR Form Res. 2022. PMID: 36542432 Free PMC article.
-
Using multiple agreement methods for continuous repeated measures data: a tutorial for practitioners.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Jun 12;20(1):154. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01022-x. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020. PMID: 32532218 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of Agreement between Measurement Methods from Data with Matched Repeated Measurements via the Coefficient of Individual Agreement.J Data Sci. 2010 Jul 1;8(3):457-469. J Data Sci. 2010. PMID: 20664753 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources