a discriminant function approach to adjust for processing and measurement error when a biomarker is assayed in pooled samples
Clicks: 95
ID: 186436
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
28.2
/100
95 views
18 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #636 of 642 articles by views in archives of biochemistry and biophysics
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 642 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Pooling biological specimens prior to performing expensive laboratory assays has been shown to be a cost effective approach for estimating parameters of interest. In addition to requiring specialized statistical techniques, however, the pooling of samples can introduce assay errors due to processing, possibly in addition to measurement error that may be present when the assay is applied to individual samples. Failure to account for these sources of error can result in biased parameter estimates and ultimately faulty inference. Prior research addressing biomarker mean and variance estimation advocates hybrid designs consisting of individual as well as pooled samples to account for measurement and processing (or pooling) error. We consider adapting this approach to the problem of estimating a covariate-adjusted odds ratio (OR) relating a binary outcome to a continuous exposure or biomarker level assessed in pools. In particular, we explore the applicability of a discriminant function-based analysis that assumes normal residual, processing, and measurement errors. A potential advantage of this method is that maximum likelihood estimation of the desired adjusted log OR is straightforward and computationally convenient. Moreover, in the absence of measurement and processing error, the method yields an efficient unbiased estimator for the parameter of interest assuming normal residual errors. We illustrate the approach using real data from an ancillary study of the Collaborative Perinatal Project, and we use simulations to demonstrate the ability of the proposed estimators to alleviate bias due to measurement and processing error.
| Reference Key |
lyles2015internationala
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Robert H. Lyles;Dane Van Domelen;Emily M. Mitchell;Enrique F. Schisterman |
| Journal | archives of biochemistry and biophysics |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
10.3390/ijerph121114723
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.