Objective comparison of quantitative imaging modalities without the use of a gold standard.
Imaging is often used for the purpose of estimating the value of some parameter of interest. For example, a cardiologist may measure the ejection fraction (EF) of the heart in order to know how much blood is being pumped out of the heart on each stroke. In clinical practice, however, it is difficult to evaluate an estimation method because the gold standard is not known, e.g., a cardiologist does not know the true EF of a patient. Thus, researchers have often evaluated an estimation method by plotting its results against the results of another (more accepted) estimation method, which amounts to using one set of estimates as the pseudogold standard. In this paper, we present a maximum-likelihood approach for evaluating and comparing different estimation methods without the use of a gold standard with specific emphasis on the problem of evaluating EF estimation methods. Results of numerous simulation studies will be presented and indicate that the method can precisely and accurately estimate the parameters of a regression line without a gold standard, i.e., without the x axis.
Hoppin
John W
JW
Department of Radiology, Arizona Health Sciences Center, Tucson 85724-5067, USA. jhoppin@math.arizona.edu
Kupinski
Matthew A
MA
Kastis
George A
GA
Clarkson
Eric
E
Barrett
Harrison H
HH
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D003955:Diagnostic Tests, Routine; D006801:Humans; D007090:Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D008955:Models, Cardiovascular; D015233:Models, Statistical; D015588:Observer Variation; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D013318:Stroke Volume