Search

Evaluation of tests for the diagnosis of childhood pulmonary tuberculosis (CPTB) is complicated by the absence of an accurate reference test. We present a Bayesian latent class analysis in which we evaluated the accuracy of 5 diagnostic tests for CPTB. We used data from a study of 749 hospitalized South African children suspected to have CPTB from 2009 to 2014. The following tests were used: mycobacterial culture, smear microscopy, Xpert MTB/RIF (Cepheid Inc.), tuberculin skin test (TST), and chest radiography. We estimated the prevalence of CPTB to be 27% (95% credible interval (CrI): 21, 35). The sensitivities of culture, Xpert, and smear microscopy were estimated to be 60% (95% CrI: 46, 76), 49% (95% CrI: 38, 62), and 22% (95% CrI: 16, 30), respectively; specificities of these tests were estimated in accordance with prior information and were close to 100%. Chest radiography was estimated to have a sensitivity of 64% (95% CrI: 55, 73) and a specificity of 78% (95% CrI: 73, 83). Sensitivity of the TST was estimated to be 75% (95% CrI: 61, 84), and it decreased substantially among children who were malnourished and infected with human immunodeficiency virus (56%). The specificity of the TST was 69% (95% CrI: 63%, 76%). Furthermore, it was estimated that 46% (95% CrI: 42, 49) of CPTB-negative cases and 93% (95% CrI: 82; 98) of CPTB-positive cases received antituberculosis treatment, which indicates substantial overtreatment and limited undertreatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Composite reference standards (CRSs) have been advocated in diagnostic accuracy studies in the absence of a perfect reference standard. The rationale is that combining results of multiple imperfect tests leads to a more accurate reference than any one test in isolation. Focusing on a CRS that classifies subjects as disease positive if at least one component test is positive, we derive algebraic expressions for sensitivity and specificity of this CRS, sensitivity and specificity of a new (index) test compared with this CRS, as well as the CRS-based prevalence. We use as a motivating example the problem of evaluating a new test for Chlamydia trachomatis, an asymptomatic disease for which no gold-standard test exists. As the number of component tests increases, sensitivity of this CRS increases at the expense specificity, unless all tests have perfect specificity. Therefore, such a CRS can lead to significantly biased accuracy estimates of the index test. The bias depends on disease prevalence and accuracy of the CRS. Further, conditional dependence between the CRS and index test can lead to over-estimation of index test accuracy estimates. This commonly-used CRS combines results from multiple imperfect tests in a way that ignores information and therefore is not guaranteed to improve over a single imperfect reference unless each component test has perfect specificity, and the CRS is conditionally independent of the index test. When these conditions are not met, as in the case of C. trachomatis testing, more realistic statistical models should be researched instead of relying on such CRSs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is currently no gold standard method for the diagnosis of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) complex in Holstein pre-weaned dairy calves. Systematic thoracic ultrasonography (TUS) has been used as a proxy for BRD, but cannot be directly used by producers. The Wisconsin calf respiratory scoring chart (CRSC) is a simpler alternative, but with unknown accuracy. Our objective was to estimate the accuracy of CRSC, while adjusting for the lack of a gold standard. Two cross sectional study populations with a high BRD prevalence ( n = 106 pre-weaned Holstein calves) and an average BRD prevalence ( n = 85 pre-weaned Holstein calves) from North America were studied. All calves were simultaneously assessed using CRSC (cutoff used ≥5) and TUS (cutoff used ≥1 cm of lung consolidation). Bayesian latent class models allowing for conditional dependence were used with informative priors for BRD prevalence and TUS accuracy (sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp)) and non-informative priors for CRSC accuracies. Robustness of the model was tested by relaxing priors for prevalence or TUS accuracy. The Se CRSC (95% credible interval (CI)) and Sp CRSC were 62.4% (47.9–75.8) and 74.1% (64.9–82.8) respectively. The Se TUS was 79.4% (66.4–90.9) and Sp TUS was 93.9% (88.0–97.6). The imperfect accuracy of CRSC and TUS should be taken into account when using those tools to assess BRD status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) statement, which was recently updated to the STARD2015 statement, was developed to encourage complete and transparent reporting of test accuracy studies. Although STARD principles apply broadly, the checklist is limited to studies designed to evaluate the accuracy of tests when the disease status is determined from a perfect reference procedure or an imperfect one with known measures of test accuracy. However, a reference standard does not always exist, especially in the case of infectious diseases with a long latent period. In such cases, a valid alternative to classical test evaluation involves the use of latent class models that do not require a priori knowledge of disease status. Latent class models have been successfully implemented in a Bayesian framework for over 20 years. The objective of this work was to identify the STARD items that require modification and develop a modified version of STARD for studies that use Bayesian latent class analysis to estimate diagnostic test accuracy in the absence of a reference standard. Examples and elaborations for each of the modified items are provided. The new guidelines, termed STARD-BLCM (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies that use Bayesian Latent Class Models), will facilitate improved quality of reporting on the design, conduct and results of diagnostic accuracy studies that use Bayesian latent class models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]