قارن الطرق
راجع الطرق التي اخترتها جنبًا إلى جنب؛ الصفوف المختلفة مميَّزة.
| تقييم التحليل التلوي للاختبارات التشخيصية× | تحليل منحنى خاصية تشغيل المستقبل (ROC)× | |
|---|---|---|
| المجال≠ | علم الأوبئة | الإحصاء |
| العائلة≠ | Process / pipeline | Hypothesis test |
| سنة النشأة≠ | 2000s (formal bivariate/HSROC framework ~2001–2005) | 1954 (signal detection); 1982 (AUC formalization) |
| صاحب الطريقة≠ | Reitsma et al. (bivariate model); Rutter & Gatsonis (HSROC model) | Peterson, Birdsall & Fox (signal detection theory); Hanley & McNeil (medical statistics) |
| النوع≠ | Quantitative evidence-synthesis method | Diagnostic accuracy evaluation |
| المصدر التأسيسي≠ | Reitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W. S., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005). Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(10), 982–990. DOI ↗ | Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982). The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143(1), 29–36. DOI ↗ |
| الأسماء البديلة | diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis, DTA meta-analysis, screening accuracy synthesis, meta-analytic DTA | ROC curve analysis, AUC analysis, sensitivity-specificity analysis, diagnostic accuracy analysis |
| ذات صلة≠ | 2 | 4 |
| الملخص≠ | Meta-analytic screening test evaluation is a quantitative evidence-synthesis approach that pools sensitivity, specificity, and related accuracy indices across multiple primary studies of the same screening or diagnostic test. It produces summary estimates of a test's ability to correctly identify disease-positive and disease-negative individuals, typically using the bivariate random-effects model or the Hierarchical Summary ROC (HSROC) framework, and visualises results with summary ROC curves and forest plots. | ROC analysis evaluates how well a continuous or ordinal test variable discriminates between two binary outcome classes. By plotting the true positive rate (sensitivity) against the false positive rate (1 − specificity) across all decision thresholds, it produces a curve whose area under the curve (AUC) quantifies overall discriminative power, ranging from 0.5 (chance) to 1.0 (perfect discrimination). |
| ScholarGateمجموعة البيانات ↗ |
|
|