Epidemiology Kept Simple Chapter 4 Screening for Disease.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
©2011 Elsevier, Inc. Molecular Tools and Infectious Disease Epidemiology Betsy Foxman Chapter 8 Determining the Reliability and Validity and Interpretation.
Advertisements

Validity and Reliability of Analytical Tests. Analytical Tests include both: Screening Tests Diagnostic Tests.
EPIDEMIOLOGY 4 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY (TRAINING AND CALIBRATION)
Lecture 3 Validity of screening and diagnostic tests
SCREENING CHP400: Community Health Program-lI Mohamed M. B. Alnoor
The Research Consumer Evaluates Measurement Reliability and Validity
Laboratory Training for Field Epidemiologists Sensitivity and specificity Predictive values positive and negative Interpretation of results Sep 2007.
Azita Kheiltash Social Medicine Specialist Tehran University of Medical Sciences Diagnostic Tests Evaluation.
GerstmanChapter 41 Epidemiology Kept Simple Chapter 4 Screening for Disease.
1 Comunicación y Gerencia 18/4/2011Dr Salwa Tayel (Screening) بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم.
Screening revision! By Ilona Blee. What are some UK Screening programmes?  Antenatal & newborn screening  Newborn Blood Spot  Newborn Hearing Screening.
Screening for Disease Guan Peng Department of Epidemiology School of Public Health, CMU.
(Medical) Diagnostic Testing. The situation Patient presents with symptoms, and is suspected of having some disease. Patient either has the disease or.
What is Screening? Basic Public Health Concepts Sheila West, Ph.D. El Maghraby Professor of Ophthalmology Wilmer Eye Institute Johns Hopkins University.
Data Management & Basic Analysis Interpretation of Diagnostic test.
DATASET INTRODUCTION 1. Dataset: Urine 2 From Cleveland Clinic
Statistics in Screening/Diagnosis
BASIC STATISTICS: AN OXYMORON? (With a little EPI thrown in…) URVASHI VAID MD, MS AUG 2012.
Lecture 4: Assessing Diagnostic and Screening Tests
Basic statistics 11/09/13.
Diagnostic Testing Ethan Cowan, MD, MS Department of Emergency Medicine Jacobi Medical Center Department of Epidemiology and Population Health Albert Einstein.
Division of Population Health Sciences Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Coláiste Ríoga na Máinleá in Éirinn Indices of Performances of CPRs Nicola.
Statistics for Health Care Biostatistics. Phases of a Full Clinical Trial Phase I – the trial takes place after the development of a therapy and is designed.
Basic Ideas and Terminology Ettore Beghi Institute for Pharmacological Research Mario Negri, Milano, Italy.
Sensitivity Sensitivity answers the following question: If a person has a disease, how often will the test be positive (true positive rate)? i.e.: if the.
Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests
CHP400: Community Health Program-lI Mohamed M. B. Alnoor Muna M H Diab SCREENING.
Sensitivity & Specificity Sam Thomson 8/12/10. Sensitivity Proportion of people with the condition who have a positive test result Proportion of people.
1 Epidemiological Measures I Screening for Disease.
MEASURES OF TEST ACCURACY AND ASSOCIATIONS DR ODIFE, U.B SR, EDM DIVISION.
Appraising A Diagnostic Test
CT image testing. What is a CT image? CT= computed tomography CT= computed tomography Examines a person in “slices” Examines a person in “slices” Creates.
Statistical test for Non continuous variables. Dr L.M.M. Nunn.
Likelihood 2005/5/22. Likelihood  probability I am likelihood I am probability.
Evidence-Based Medicine Diagnosis Component 2 / Unit 5 1 Health IT Workforce Curriculum Version 1.0 /Fall 2010.
Chapter 10 Screening for Disease
Evaluating Results of Learning Blaž Zupan
Instructor Resource Chapter 6 Copyright © Scott B. Patten, 2015.
TESTING A TEST Ian McDowell Department of Epidemiology & Community Medicine January 2008.
Evaluating Screening Programs Dr. Jørn Olsen Epi 200B January 19, 2010.
Prediction statistics Prediction generally True and false, positives and negatives Quality of a prediction Usefulness of a prediction Prediction goes Bayesian.
Screening of diseases Dr Zhian S Ramzi Screening 1 Dr. Zhian S Ramzi.
Diagnostic Tests Afshin Ostovar Bushehr University of Medical Sciences Bushehr, /7/20151.
1 Wrap up SCREENING TESTS. 2 Screening test The basic tool of a screening program easy to use, rapid and inexpensive. 1.2.
Predictive values prevalence CK and acute myocardial infarction –sensitivity 70% –specificity 80% –prevalence - 40% –prevalence - 20% –PPV and NPV.
Diagnostic Tests Studies 87/3/2 “How to read a paper” workshop Kamran Yazdani, MD MPH.
Inter-rater Reliability of Clinical Ratings: A Brief Primer on Kappa Daniel H. Mathalon, Ph.D., M.D. Department of Psychiatry Yale University School of.
Screening.  “...the identification of unrecognized disease or defect by the application of tests, examinations or other procedures...”  “...sort out.
Evidence based medicine Diagnostic tests Ross Lawrenson.
10 May Understanding diagnostic tests Evan Sergeant AusVet Animal Health Services.
RELIABILITY OF DISEASE CLASSIFICATION Nigel Paneth.
Diagnosis Examination(MMSE) in detecting dementia among elderly patients living in the community. Excel.
MR. MARC ONEEL C. ALVAREZ, RN, RM, MAN Mr. Marc Oneel C. Alvarez, RN, RM, MAN.
Timothy Wiemken, PhD MPH Assistant Professor Division of Infectious Diseases Diagnostic Tests.
SCREENING FOR DISEASE. Learning Objectives Definition of screening; Principles of Screening.
Biostatistics Board Review Parul Chaudhri, DO Family Medicine Faculty Development Fellow, UPMC St Margaret March 5, 2016.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC. Chapter 12 Clinical Epidemiology.
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Receiver- Operator Characteristic Curves 10/10/2013.
Performance of a diagnostic test Tunisia, 31 Oct 2014
DR.FATIMA ALKHALEDY M.B.Ch.B;F.I.C.M.S/C.M
Principles of Epidemiology E
Class session 7 Screening, validity, reliability
Comunicación y Gerencia
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Clinical Epidemiology
What is Screening? Basic Public Health Concepts Sheila West, Ph.D.
Diagnosis II Dr. Brent E. Faught, Ph.D. Assistant Professor
What is Screening? Basic Public Health Concepts Sheila West, Ph.D.
The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve
Patricia Butterfield & Naomi Chaytor October 18th, 2017
Evidence Based Diagnosis
Presentation transcript:

Epidemiology Kept Simple Chapter 4 Screening for Disease

§4.1 Introduction (comment) Accurate identification of true health status -- essential for all epi. workAccurate identification of true health status -- essential for all epi. work The term disease refers to any health condition or health determinantThe term disease refers to any health condition or health determinant

Sources of Epi Information Interview (direct, surrogate)Interview (direct, surrogate) QuestionnaireQuestionnaire Pre-existing recordsPre-existing records Direct examinationDirect examination

Signs, Symptoms, and Tests Sign = observation by trained observerSign = observation by trained observer Symptom = observation by patientSymptom = observation by patient Tests = any objective resultTests = any objective result

Reproducibility and Validity Reproducibility = agreement upon repetitionReproducibility = agreement upon repetition Validity = ability to discriminate those with and without diseaseValidity = ability to discriminate those with and without disease A test can be reproducible but not validA test can be reproducible but not valid A test can be valid but not reproducibleA test can be valid but not reproducible

§4.2 Reproducibility Statistics Overall agreementOverall agreement Percentage of diagnoses that agreePercentage of diagnoses that agree Some agreement due to chance (e.g., two coins flipped simultaneously will agree 50% of time)Some agreement due to chance (e.g., two coins flipped simultaneously will agree 50% of time) Kappa statistic - quantifies percent agreement above chanceKappa statistic - quantifies percent agreement above chance

Kappa Statistic (Formula) Rater 2 Rater 1 +-Total +ab p1p1p1p1 -cd q1q1q1q1 Total p2p2p2p2 q2q2q2q2N Text says to convert counts to proportions, but this is not necessary

Kappa Statistic (Illustration) Rater 2 Rater 1 +-Total Total

Interpretation of Kappa Percent agreement above chancePercent agreement above chance The closer to 1, better agreementThe closer to 1, better agreement Range of Kappa Interpretation >.75 Excellent agreement.40 to.75 Good agreement <.40 Poor agreement

§4.3 Validity Compare test results to definitive diagnostic procedure (“gold standard”)Compare test results to definitive diagnostic procedure (“gold standard”) Each case classified asEach case classified as TP = true positiveTP = true positive TN = true negativeTN = true negative FP = false positiveFP = false positive FN = false negativeFN = false negative

Organize Data in Table Gold Standard Test Result +-Total +TPFPTP+FP -FNTNFN+TN TotalTP+FNFP+TN n

Definitions Notation: Pr(T|D) = probability test result given disease statusNotation: Pr(T|D) = probability test result given disease status Sensitivity = Pr(T+|D+)Sensitivity = Pr(T+|D+) Specificity = Pr(T-|D-)Specificity = Pr(T-|D-) Predictive value positive = Pr(D+|T+)Predictive value positive = Pr(D+|T+) Predictive value negative = Pr(D-|T-)Predictive value negative = Pr(D-|T-) Prevalence = Pr(D+)Prevalence = Pr(D+)

Formulas SEN = TP / (TP + FN)SEN = TP / (TP + FN) SPEC = TN / (TN + FP)SPEC = TN / (TN + FP) PVP = TP / (TP + FP)PVP = TP / (TP + FP) PVN = TN / (TN + FN)PVN = TN / (TN + FN)

Example (HIV Screening Test) Prevalence = 1000 / 1,000,000 =.001 SEN = 990 / 1000 =.99SEN = 990 / 1000 =.99 SPEC = 989,010 / 999,000 =.99SPEC = 989,010 / 999,000 =.99 PVP = 990 / 10,980 =.09PVP = 990 / 10,980 =.09 PVN = 989,010 / 989,020  1.000PVN = 989,010 / 989,020  HIV Screening Test +-Total +9909,99010, ,010989,020 Total ,0001,000,000

Example (HIV Screening Test) Prevalence = 10,000 / 1,000,000 =.10 SEN = / 100,000 =.99SEN = / 100,000 =.99 SPEC = 891,000 / 900,000 =.99SPEC = 891,000 / 900,000 =.99 PVP = 99,000 / 108,000 =.92PVP = 99,000 / 108,000 =.92 PVN = 891,000 / 900,000 =.99PVN = 891,000 / 900,000 =.99 HIV Screening Test +-Total +99,0009,000108,000 -1,000891,000892,000 Total100,000900,0001,000,000

Conclusion A test that is 99% sensitive and 99% specific is used in two populationsA test that is 99% sensitive and 99% specific is used in two populations In low prevalence population PVP =.09In low prevalence population PVP =.09 In high prevalence population, PVP =.92In high prevalence population, PVP =.92 Therefore, PVP is a function of prevalenceTherefore, PVP is a function of prevalence

Relation Between Predictive and Prevalence Value PVP is a function ofPVP is a function of Test SENTest SEN Test SPECTest SPEC prior probability (prevalence) of diseaseprior probability (prevalence) of disease Bayesian formulas on pp (NR)Bayesian formulas on pp (NR)

Selecting a Cutoff for a Test HIV screening test detects color change (Optical Density Ratio)HIV screening test detects color change (Optical Density Ratio) Can change cutoff for amount of color change to classify as “positive”Can change cutoff for amount of color change to classify as “positive”

Use Low Cutoff no false negatives (high SEN)no false negatives (high SEN) many false positive (low SPEC)many false positive (low SPEC)

Use High Cutoff no false positive (high SPEC)no false positive (high SPEC) many false negative (low SEN)many false negative (low SEN)

Use In-Between Cutoff medium no. of false positive (intermediate SPEC)medium no. of false positive (intermediate SPEC) medium no. of false negative (intermediate SEN)medium no. of false negative (intermediate SEN)