A likelihood based sensitivity analysis for publication bias on summary ROC in meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy
Yi Zhou, Ao Huang, Satoshi Hattori

TL;DR
This paper introduces a likelihood-based sensitivity analysis method to assess the impact of publication bias on summary ROC and AUC in meta-analyses of diagnostic tests, accounting for selective publication mechanisms.
Contribution
It extends Copas' likelihood-based sensitivity analysis to the bivariate model for diagnostic accuracy, enabling bias correction under various publication selection scenarios.
Findings
Method effectively evaluates publication bias impact on SROC and SAUC.
Simulation studies demonstrate the method's accuracy and robustness.
Application to real data illustrates practical utility.
Abstract
In meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy, summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) is a recommended method to summarize the discriminant capacity of a diagnostic test in the presence of study-specific cutoff values and the area under the SROC (SAUC) gives the aggregate measure of test accuracy. SROC or SAUC can be estimated by bivariate modelling of pairs of sensitivity and specificity over the primary diagnostic studies. However, publication bias is a major threat to the validity of estimates in meta-analysis. To address this issue, we propose to adopt sensitivity analysis to make an objective inference for the impact of publication bias on SROC or SAUC. We extend Copas likelihood based sensitivity analysis to the bivariate normal model used for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy to evaluate how much SROC or SAUC would change with different selection probabilities…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials · Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
