Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic tests using PROC MCMC program in SAS software

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-5501.2019.03.009

Chinese Journal of Evidence -Based Pediatric ›› 2019, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (3): 205-211.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5501.2019.03.009

• Original Papers • Previous Articles Next Articles

Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic tests using PROC MCMC program in SAS software

XU Pei-hua, ZHENG Jian-qing

Department of Radiation Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou 362000, China

Received:2019-04-25 Online:2019-06-25
Contact: ZHENG Jian-qing, E-mail: 18060108268@189.cn

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To introduce the Bayesian meta-analysis of the diagnostic test using the SAC software PROC MCMC program.Methods Meta-analysis code based on SAS PROC MCMC program prepared by Menke J was used and the study on the accuracy of high-resolution ultrasound diagnosis of anterior disc displacement of temporomandibular joint published by Dong Xiaoyu et al. was selected as an example data. Bayesian meta-analysis implementation method for diagnostic test was introduced.Results Based on the example data, the Results of Bayesian fixed effect model and random effect model meta-analysis were given. The Results of random effects analysis showed that the combined sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic Odds Ratio (DOR)of high-resolution ultrasound diagnosis for anterior disc displacement with reduction (ADDWR) were 0.852 (95%CI: 0.766-0.924), 0.865 (95%CI: 0.760-0.944), 53.413 (95%CI: 11.855-170.4) respectively.Conclusion SAS PROC MCMC was an excellent method for achieving bivariate random effects Bayesian meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity.

Key words: Bayesian meta-analysis, Diagnostic test, Hierarchical models, Markov chain Monte Carlo methods, Systematic reviews

XU Pei-hua, ZHENG Jian-qing. Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic tests using PROC MCMC program in SAS software[J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence -Based Pediatric, 2019, 14(3): 205-211.

References

[1]Chu H, Guo H. A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Biostatistics, 2009, 10(1): 201-203
[2]Foxlee N, Stone JC, Doi SA. A comparison of univariate and bivariate models in meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Int J Evid Based Healthc, 2015, 13(1): 28-34
[3]Menke J. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with SAS PROC GLIMMIX. Methods Inf Med, 2010, 49(1): 54-62
[4]Harbord RM, Whiting P, Sterne JA, et al. An empirical comparison of methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy showed hierarchical models are necessary. J Clin Epidemiol, 2008, 61(11): 1095-1103
[5]Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med, 2001, 20(19): 2865-2884
[6]Moreno E, Vazquez-Polo FJ, Negrin MA. Bayesian meta-analysis: The role of the between-sample heterogeneity. Stat Methods Med Res, 2018, 27(12): 3643-3657
[7]Sutton AJ, Abrams KR. Bayesian methods in meta-analysis and evidence synthesis. Stat Methods Med Res, 2001, 10(4): 277-303
[8]张天嵩, 董圣杰, 周支瑞. 高级Meta分析方法-基于Stata实现. 上海: 复旦大学出版社, 2015
[9]Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, et al. WinBUGS-A Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput, 2000, 10(4): 325-337
[10]Menke J. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with the Bayesian SAS PROC MCMC: methodology and empirical evaluation in 50 meta-analyses. Med Decis Making, 2013, 33(5): 692-701
[11]Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, et al. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol, 2005, 58(10): 982-990
[12]董小宇, 朱祖凤, 张新丽, 等. 应用HSROC统计模型对高分辨率超声诊断颞下颌关节盘前移位准确性的meta分析. 中国口腔颌面外科杂志, 2014, 12(3): 266-272
[13]张天嵩, 熊茜. HSROC模型在诊断试验Meta分析中的应用及Stata实现. 循证医学, 2012, 12(4): 241-243, 247
[14]Kruschke JK, Liddell TM. The Bayesian New Statistics: Hypothesis testing, estimation, meta-analysis, and power analysis from a Bayesian perspective. Psychon Bull Rev, 2018, 25(1): 178-206
[15]Negeri ZF, Shaikh M, Beyene J. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis models for diagnostic test accuracy studies using arcsine-based transformations. Biom J, 2018, 60(4): 827-844
[16]Dahabreh IJ, Trikalinos TA, Lau J, et al. Univariate and bivariate likelihood-based meta-analysis methods performed comparably when marginal sensitivity and specificity were the targets of inference. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 83: 8-17
[17]Van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med, 2002, 21(4): 589-624
[18]Van Ravenzwaaij D, Cassey P, Brown SD. A simple introduction to Markov Chain Monte-Carlo sampling. Psychon Bull Rev, 2018, 25(1): 143-154
[19]Lin C, Chu CM, Su SL. Epistasis test in Meta-analysis: A multi-parameter markov chain monte carlo model for consistency of evidence. PLoS One, 2016, 11(4): e0152891

Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic tests using PROC MCMC program in SAS software

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 2

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	. [J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence -Based Pediatric, 2018, 13(1): 78-80.
[2]	. The baseline of diagnostic systematic reviews published by authors in mainland China [J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence -Based Pediatric, 2013, 8(5): 388-390.