Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 1982; 21(03): 149-153
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1635401
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH

Index for Rating Predictive Accuracy of Screening Tests

Index Zur Einstufung Der Vorhersagegenauigkeit Von Vorsorgeuntersuchungen
B. C. K. Choi   *
1   From the Department of Preventive Medicine and Biostatistics, University of Toronto, Canada
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
19 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

This paper proposes a new pair of indices, the »predictive powers«, for measuring the predictive accuracy (predictivity) of screening tests.

Sensitivity and specificity are indices for measuring the validity of a test. They give the probability of a certain test result given a substance of known condition (a carcinogen or a non-carcinogen). They do not describe the predictive accuracy of a test, which is the probability of a certain condition (a carcinogen or a non-carcinogen) given a known test result. Predictive values are unsuitable measures for characterizing a test since they are seriously affected by the prevalence of carcinogens. However, the predictive powers do not have this limitation and are shown to be useful indices for the purpose of rating the predictive accuracies of various screening tests.

In dieser Arbeit werden zwei neue Indices vorgeschlagen, die »Vorhersageschärfen«, zur Messung der Vorhersagegenauigkeit (predictivity) von Vorsorgeuntersuchungen.

Sensitivität und Spezifizität sind Indices zur Messung der Validität eines Tests. Sie geben die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines bestimmten Untersuchungsergebnisses beim Vorliegen eines bekannten Stoffes (einer karzinogenen oder nicht karzinogenen Substanz) an. Sie beschreiben nicht die Vorhersagegenauigkeit eines Tests; das ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit einer bestimmten Eigenschaft (karzinogen oder nicht karzinogen) beim Vorliegen eines bekannten Untersuchungsergebnisses. Vorhersagewerte sind nicht dazu geeignet, einen Test zu charakterisieren, da sie durch die Prävalenz von Karzinogenen ernsthaft beeinflußt werden. Die Vorhersageschärfen jedoch sind frei von solcher Einschränkung und erweisen sich als nützliche Indices zum Zwecke der Einstufung der Vorhersagegenauigkeiten verschiedener Vorsorgeuntersuchungen.

Key-Words

Screening Tests - Predictive Accuracy - Predictive Power

Schlüssel-Wörter

Screening-Tests - prädiktiver Wert - Vorhersageschärfe

* Research student of the National Cancer Institute of Canada.


 

  • References

  • 1 Ames B. N. Identifying environmental chemicals causing mutations and cancer. Science 1979; 204: 587-592.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Armitage P. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1971
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Barnoon S, Wolfe H. Measuring the Effectiveness of Medical Decisions — An Operations Research Approach. Illinois: C. C. Thomas; 1972
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Bayes T. An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Philos. Trans 53 (1763) 370-418 reproduced in: Biometrika 1958; 45: 293-315.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bennett B. M. On comparisons of sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of a number of diagnostic procedures. Biometrics 1972; 28: 793-800.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Breslow N. E, Day N. E. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Vol. 1: The Analysis of Case-Control Studies. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1980
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Bridges B. A. Short term screening tests for carcinogenicity. Nature 1976; 261: 195-200.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Brusick D. J. The role of short-term testing in carcinogen detection. Chemosphere 1978; 7: 403-417.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Calkins D. R, Dixon R. L, Gerber C. R, Zarin D, Omenn G. S. Identification, characterization, and control of potential human carcinogens: A framework for federal decision-making. J. nat. Cancer Inst 1980; 64: 169-176.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Choi B.C.K. Evaluation of the Salmonella typhimurium/ microsome test system (the Ames test) as a short-term screen- ing method for the detection of chemical carcinogens. MSc Thesis. Department of Safety and Hygiene; University of Aston in Birmingham UK: 1978
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Cole P, Morrison A. S. Basic issues in population screening for cancer. J. nat. Cancer Inst 1980; 64: 1263-1272.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cooper J. A, Saracci R, Cole P. Describing the validity of carcinogen screening tests. Brit. J. Cancer 1979; 39: 87-89.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cox D. R. The Analysis of Binary Data. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd; 1970
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Feinstein A. R. Clinical biostatistics. XXXI. On the sensitivity, specificity, and discrimination of diagnostic tests. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther 1975; 17: 104-116.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Greenhouse S. W, Cornfield J. The Youden index: Letters to the editor. Cancer 1950; 3: 1097-1101.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Heddle J. A, Bruce W. R. Comparison of tests for mutagenicity or carcinogenicity using assays for sperm abnormalities, formation of micronuclei, and mutations in Salmonella. In Hiatt H. H, Watson J. D, Winsten J. A. (Eds): Origins of Human Cancer, Book C Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 1977: 1549-1557.
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Lusted L. B. Introduction to Medical Decision Making. Illinois: C. C. Thomas; 1968
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Magee P. N. Testing for carcinogens and mutagens. Nature 1974; 249: 795-796.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 McCann J, Ames B. N. Detection of carcinogens as mutagens in the Salmonella/microsome test: Assay of 300 chemicals: Discussion. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. USA 1976; 73: 950-954.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 McCann J, Choi E, Yamasaki E, Ames B. N. Detec- tion of carcinogens as mutagens in the Salmonella/microsome test: Assay of 300 chemicals. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. USA 1975; 72: 5135-5139.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 McCann J, Spingarn N. E, Kobori J, Ames B. N. Detection of carcinogens as mutagens: Bacterial tester strains with R factor plasmids. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. USA 1975; 72: 983.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Morgan R. W. Prospects for Preventive Medicine. Toronto: Ontario Economic Council; 1977
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Muic V, Petres J. J, Telisman Z. Validity of a diagnostic test designated by a single function. Meth. Inform. Med 1973; 12: 244-248.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Purchase I. F. H, Longstaff E, Ashby J, Styles J. A, Anderson D, Lefevre P. A, Westwood F. R. Evaluation of six short term tests for detecting organic chemical carcinogens and recommendations for their use. Nature 1976; 264: 624-627.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Purchase I. F. H, Longstaff E, Ashby J, Styles J. A, Anderson D, Lefevre P. A, Westwood F. R. An evaluation of six short-term tests for detecting organic chemical carcinogens. Brit. J. Cancer 1978; 37: 873-959.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Spicer C. C. Test reduction: II-Bayes’s theorem and the evaluation of tests. Brit. med. J 1980; 281: 592-594.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Stoltz D. R, Poirer L. A, Irving C. L, Stich H. F, Weisburger J. H, Grice H. C. Evaluation of short term tests for carcinogenicity. Toxicol, appl. Pharmacol 1974; 29: 157-180.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Vecchio T. J. Predictive value of a single diagnostic test in unselected populations. New Engl. J. Med 1966; 274: 1171-1173.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Youden W. J. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950; 3: 32-35.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Gahlen R. S, Gambino S. R. Beyond Normality: The Predictive Value and Efficiency of Medical Diagnosis. New York: J. Wiley & Sons; 1975
    Google Scholar