How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.

The indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) is considered a reference test for scrub typhus. Recently, the Scrub Typhus Infection Criteria (STIC; a combination of culture, PCR assays and IFA IgM) were proposed as a reference standard for evaluating alternative diagnostic tests. Here, we use Bayesian...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cherry Lim, Daniel H Paris, Stuart D Blacksell, Achara Laongnualpanich, Pacharee Kantipong, Wirongrong Chierakul, Vanaporn Wuthiekanun, Nicholas P J Day, Ben S Cooper, Direk Limmathurotsakul
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2015-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4449177?pdf=render
id doaj-90f820dc4b1f4587a3eb23a9386a59aa
record_format Article
spelling doaj-90f820dc4b1f4587a3eb23a9386a59aa2020-11-24T21:35:49ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032015-01-01105e011493010.1371/journal.pone.0114930How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.Cherry LimDaniel H ParisStuart D BlacksellAchara LaongnualpanichPacharee KantipongWirongrong ChierakulVanaporn WuthiekanunNicholas P J DayBen S CooperDirek LimmathurotsakulThe indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) is considered a reference test for scrub typhus. Recently, the Scrub Typhus Infection Criteria (STIC; a combination of culture, PCR assays and IFA IgM) were proposed as a reference standard for evaluating alternative diagnostic tests. Here, we use Bayesian latent class models (LCMs) to estimate the true accuracy of each diagnostic test, and of STIC, for diagnosing scrub typhus.Data from 161 patients with undifferentiated fever were re-evaluated using Bayesian LCMs. Every patient was evaluated for the presence of an eschar, and tested with blood culture for Orientia tsutsugamushi, three different PCR assays, IFA IgM, and the Panbio IgM immunochromatographic test (ICT). True sensitivity and specificity of culture (24.4% and 100%), 56kDa PCR assay (56.8% and 98.4%), 47kDa PCR assay (63.2% and 96.1%), groEL PCR assay (71.4% and 93.0%), IFA IgM (70.0% and 83.8%), PanBio IgM ICT (72.8% and 96.8%), presence of eschar (42.7% and 98.9%) and STIC (90.5% and 82.5%) estimated by Bayesian LCM were considerably different from those obtained when using STIC as a reference standard. The IgM ICT had comparable sensitivity and significantly higher specificity compared to IFA (p=0.34 and p<0.001, respectively).The low specificity of STIC was caused by the low specificity of IFA IgM. Neither STIC nor IFA IgM can be used as reference standards against which to evaluate alternative diagnostic tests. Further evaluation of new diagnostic tests should be done with a carefully selected set of diagnostic tests and appropriate statistical models.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4449177?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Cherry Lim
Daniel H Paris
Stuart D Blacksell
Achara Laongnualpanich
Pacharee Kantipong
Wirongrong Chierakul
Vanaporn Wuthiekanun
Nicholas P J Day
Ben S Cooper
Direk Limmathurotsakul
spellingShingle Cherry Lim
Daniel H Paris
Stuart D Blacksell
Achara Laongnualpanich
Pacharee Kantipong
Wirongrong Chierakul
Vanaporn Wuthiekanun
Nicholas P J Day
Ben S Cooper
Direk Limmathurotsakul
How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Cherry Lim
Daniel H Paris
Stuart D Blacksell
Achara Laongnualpanich
Pacharee Kantipong
Wirongrong Chierakul
Vanaporn Wuthiekanun
Nicholas P J Day
Ben S Cooper
Direk Limmathurotsakul
author_sort Cherry Lim
title How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.
title_short How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.
title_full How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.
title_fullStr How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.
title_full_unstemmed How to Determine the Accuracy of an Alternative Diagnostic Test when It Is Actually Better than the Reference Tests: A Re-Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Scrub Typhus Using Bayesian LCMs.
title_sort how to determine the accuracy of an alternative diagnostic test when it is actually better than the reference tests: a re-evaluation of diagnostic tests for scrub typhus using bayesian lcms.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2015-01-01
description The indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) is considered a reference test for scrub typhus. Recently, the Scrub Typhus Infection Criteria (STIC; a combination of culture, PCR assays and IFA IgM) were proposed as a reference standard for evaluating alternative diagnostic tests. Here, we use Bayesian latent class models (LCMs) to estimate the true accuracy of each diagnostic test, and of STIC, for diagnosing scrub typhus.Data from 161 patients with undifferentiated fever were re-evaluated using Bayesian LCMs. Every patient was evaluated for the presence of an eschar, and tested with blood culture for Orientia tsutsugamushi, three different PCR assays, IFA IgM, and the Panbio IgM immunochromatographic test (ICT). True sensitivity and specificity of culture (24.4% and 100%), 56kDa PCR assay (56.8% and 98.4%), 47kDa PCR assay (63.2% and 96.1%), groEL PCR assay (71.4% and 93.0%), IFA IgM (70.0% and 83.8%), PanBio IgM ICT (72.8% and 96.8%), presence of eschar (42.7% and 98.9%) and STIC (90.5% and 82.5%) estimated by Bayesian LCM were considerably different from those obtained when using STIC as a reference standard. The IgM ICT had comparable sensitivity and significantly higher specificity compared to IFA (p=0.34 and p<0.001, respectively).The low specificity of STIC was caused by the low specificity of IFA IgM. Neither STIC nor IFA IgM can be used as reference standards against which to evaluate alternative diagnostic tests. Further evaluation of new diagnostic tests should be done with a carefully selected set of diagnostic tests and appropriate statistical models.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4449177?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT cherrylim howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT danielhparis howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT stuartdblacksell howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT acharalaongnualpanich howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT pachareekantipong howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT wirongrongchierakul howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT vanapornwuthiekanun howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT nicholaspjday howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT benscooper howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
AT direklimmathurotsakul howtodeterminetheaccuracyofanalternativediagnostictestwhenitisactuallybetterthanthereferencetestsareevaluationofdiagnostictestsforscrubtyphususingbayesianlcms
_version_ 1725943799126949888