TY - JOUR
T1 - A case study of an individual participant data meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy showed that prediction regions represented heterogeneity well
AU - DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) PHQ-9 Collaboration
AU - de Lara, Aurelio López Malo Vázquez
AU - Bhandari, Parash Mani
AU - Wu, Yin
AU - Levis, Brooke
AU - Thombs, Brett
AU - Benedetti, Andrea
AU - Sun, Ying
AU - He, Chen
AU - Krishnan, Ankur
AU - Neupane, Dipika
AU - Negeri, Zelalem
AU - Imran, Mahrukh
AU - Rice, Danielle B.
AU - Riehm, Kira E.
AU - Saadat, Nazanin
AU - Azar, Marleine
AU - Boruff, Jill
AU - Cuijpers, Pim
AU - Gilbody, Simon
AU - Ioannidis, John P.A.
AU - Kloda, Lorie A.
AU - McMillan, Dean
AU - Patten, Scott B.
AU - Shrier, Ian
AU - Ziegelstein, Roy C.
AU - Akena, Dickens H.
AU - Arroll, Bruce
AU - Ayalon, Liat
AU - Baradaran, Hamid R.
AU - Beraldi, Anna
AU - Bombardier, Charles H.
AU - Butterworth, Peter
AU - Carter, Gregory
AU - Chagas, Marcos H.
AU - Chan, Juliana C.N.
AU - Cholera, Rushina
AU - Chowdhary, Neerja
AU - Clover, Kerrie
AU - Conwell, Yeates
AU - de Man-van Ginkel, Janneke M.
AU - Delgadillo, Jaime
AU - Fann, Jesse R.
AU - Fischer, Felix H.
AU - Fung, Daniel
AU - Gelaye, Bizu
AU - Goodyear-Smith, Felicity
AU - Greeno, Catherine G.
AU - Hall, Brian J.
AU - Härter, Martin
AU - Jetté, Nathalie
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - The diagnostic accuracy of a screening tool is often characterized by its sensitivity and specificity. An analysis of these measures must consider their intrinsic correlation. In the context of an individual participant data meta-analysis, heterogeneity is one of the main components of the analysis. When using a random-effects meta-analytic model, prediction regions provide deeper insight into the effect of heterogeneity on the variability of estimated accuracy measures across the entire studied population, not just the average. This study aimed to investigate heterogeneity via prediction regions in an individual participant data meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for screening to detect major depression. From the total number of studies in the pool, four dates were selected containing roughly 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of the total number of participants. A bivariate random-effects model was fitted to studies up to and including each of these dates to jointly estimate sensitivity and specificity. Two-dimensional prediction regions were plotted in ROC-space. Subgroup analyses were carried out on sex and age, regardless of the date of the study. The dataset comprised 17,436 participants from 58 primary studies of which 2322 (13.3%) presented cases of major depression. Point estimates of sensitivity and specificity did not differ importantly as more studies were added to the model. However, correlation of the measures increased. As expected, standard errors of the logit pooled TPR and FPR consistently decreased as more studies were used, while standard deviations of the random-effects did not decrease monotonically. Subgroup analysis by sex did not reveal important contributions for observed heterogeneity; however, the shape of the prediction regions differed. Subgroup analysis by age did not reveal meaningful contributions to the heterogeneity and the prediction regions were similar in shape. Prediction intervals and regions reveal previously unseen trends in a dataset. In the context of a meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy, prediction regions can display the range of accuracy measures in different populations and settings.
AB - The diagnostic accuracy of a screening tool is often characterized by its sensitivity and specificity. An analysis of these measures must consider their intrinsic correlation. In the context of an individual participant data meta-analysis, heterogeneity is one of the main components of the analysis. When using a random-effects meta-analytic model, prediction regions provide deeper insight into the effect of heterogeneity on the variability of estimated accuracy measures across the entire studied population, not just the average. This study aimed to investigate heterogeneity via prediction regions in an individual participant data meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for screening to detect major depression. From the total number of studies in the pool, four dates were selected containing roughly 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of the total number of participants. A bivariate random-effects model was fitted to studies up to and including each of these dates to jointly estimate sensitivity and specificity. Two-dimensional prediction regions were plotted in ROC-space. Subgroup analyses were carried out on sex and age, regardless of the date of the study. The dataset comprised 17,436 participants from 58 primary studies of which 2322 (13.3%) presented cases of major depression. Point estimates of sensitivity and specificity did not differ importantly as more studies were added to the model. However, correlation of the measures increased. As expected, standard errors of the logit pooled TPR and FPR consistently decreased as more studies were used, while standard deviations of the random-effects did not decrease monotonically. Subgroup analysis by sex did not reveal important contributions for observed heterogeneity; however, the shape of the prediction regions differed. Subgroup analysis by age did not reveal meaningful contributions to the heterogeneity and the prediction regions were similar in shape. Prediction intervals and regions reveal previously unseen trends in a dataset. In the context of a meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy, prediction regions can display the range of accuracy measures in different populations and settings.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85161208731&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41598-023-36129-w
DO - 10.1038/s41598-023-36129-w
M3 - Article
C2 - 37286580
AN - SCOPUS:85161208731
SN - 2045-2322
VL - 13
JO - Scientific Reports
JF - Scientific Reports
IS - 1
M1 - 9275
ER -