Assessing agreement between two measurement systems: An alternative to the limits of agreement approach
- PMID: 26335274
- DOI: 10.1177/0962280215601133
Assessing agreement between two measurement systems: An alternative to the limits of agreement approach
Abstract
The comparison of two measurement systems is important in medical and other contexts. A common goal is to decide if a new measurement system agrees suitably with an existing one, and hence whether the two can be used interchangeably. Various methods for assessing interchangeability are available, the most popular being the limits of agreement approach due to Bland and Altman. In this article, we review the challenges of this technique and propose a model-based framework for comparing measurement systems that overcomes those challenges. The proposal is based on a simple metric, the probability of agreement, and a corresponding plot which can be used to summarize the agreement between two measurement systems. We also make recommendations for a study design that facilitates accurate and precise estimation of the probability of agreement.
Keywords: Bias; homoscedasticity; interchangeability; measurement error; probability of agreement; repeatability.
Similar articles
-
Comparing heteroscedastic measurement systems with the probability of agreement.Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Nov;27(11):3420-3435. doi: 10.1177/0962280217702540. Epub 2017 May 8. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018. PMID: 28480826
-
How to regress and predict in a Bland-Altman plot? Review and contribution based on tolerance intervals and correlated-errors-in-variables models.Stat Med. 2016 Jun 30;35(14):2328-58. doi: 10.1002/sim.6872. Epub 2016 Jan 28. Stat Med. 2016. PMID: 26822948 Review.
-
L-statistics of absolute differences for quantifying the agreement between two variables.J Biopharm Stat. 2019;29(1):174-188. doi: 10.1080/10543406.2018.1489406. Epub 2018 Jun 28. J Biopharm Stat. 2019. PMID: 29953327
-
Sample Size for Assessing Agreement between Two Methods of Measurement by Bland-Altman Method.Int J Biostat. 2016 Nov 1;12(2):/j/ijb.2016.12.issue-2/ijb-2015-0039/ijb-2015-0039.xml. doi: 10.1515/ijb-2015-0039. Int J Biostat. 2016. PMID: 27838682
-
Understanding Bland Altman analysis.Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015 Jun 5;25(2):141-51. doi: 10.11613/BM.2015.015. eCollection 2015. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015. PMID: 26110027 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Critical appraisal of the CLSI guideline EP09c "measurement procedure comparison and bias estimation using patient samples".Clin Chem Lab Med. 2024 Aug 19;63(3):507-514. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2024-0595. Print 2025 Feb 25. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2024. PMID: 39153193
-
A novel software for method comparison: MCS (method comparison software)-assessing agreement between estimated fetal weights calculated by Hadlock I-V formulas and birth weight.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Nov;310(5):2439-2452. doi: 10.1007/s00404-024-07680-2. Epub 2024 Aug 30. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024. PMID: 39212750 Free PMC article.
-
Noncontact Heart and Respiratory Rate Monitoring of Preterm Infants Based on a Computer Vision System: Protocol for a Method Comparison Study.JMIR Res Protoc. 2019 Aug 29;8(8):e13400. doi: 10.2196/13400. JMIR Res Protoc. 2019. PMID: 31469077 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.
-
Use of clinical tolerance limits for assessing agreement.Stat Methods Med Res. 2023 Jan;32(1):195-206. doi: 10.1177/09622802221137743. Epub 2022 Nov 9. Stat Methods Med Res. 2023. PMID: 36352556 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources