IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0262944.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An intercomparison study of ELISAs for the detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus – evaluating six conditionally dependent tests

Author

Listed:
  • Clara Schoneberg
  • Jens Böttcher
  • Britta Janowetz
  • Anja Rostalski
  • Lothar Kreienbrock
  • Amely Campe

Abstract

Latent class analysis is a widely used statistical method for evaluating diagnostic tests without any gold standard. It requires the results of at least two tests applied to the same individuals. Based on the resulting response patterns, the method estimates the test accuracy and the unknown disease status for all individuals in the sample. An important assumption is the conditional independence of the tests. If tests with the same biological principle are used, the assumption is not fulfilled, which may lead to biased results. In a recent publication, we developed a method that considers the dependencies in the latent class model and estimates all parameters using frequentist methods. Here, we evaluate the practicability of the method by applying it to the results of six ELISA tests for antibodies against the porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus in pigs that generally follow the same biological principle. First, we present different methods of identifying suitable starting values for the algorithm and apply these to the dataset and a vaccinated subgroup. We present the calculated values of the test accuracies, the estimated proportion of antibody-positive animals and the dependency structure for both datasets. Different starting values led to matching results for the entire dataset. For the vaccinated subgroup, the results were more dependent on the selected starting values. All six ELISA tests are well suited to detect antibodies against PRRS virus, whereas none of the tests had the best values for sensitivity and specificity simultaneously. The results thus show that the method used is able to determine the parameter values of conditionally dependent tests with suitable starting values. The choice of test should be based on the general fit-for-purpose concept and the population under study.

Suggested Citation

  • Clara Schoneberg & Jens Böttcher & Britta Janowetz & Anja Rostalski & Lothar Kreienbrock & Amely Campe, 2022. "An intercomparison study of ELISAs for the detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus – evaluating six conditionally dependent tests," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0262944
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262944
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0262944
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0262944&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0262944?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marios P. Georgiadis & Wesley O. Johnson & Ian A. Gardner & Ramanpreet Singh, 2003. "Correlation‐adjusted estimation of sensitivity and specificity of two diagnostic tests," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 52(1), pages 63-76, January.
    2. Paul S. Albert & Lisa M. McShane & Joanna H. Shih, 2001. "Latent Class Modeling Approaches for Assessing Diagnostic Error without a Gold Standard: With Applications to p53 Immunohistochemical Assays in Bladder Tumors," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 610-619, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul S. Albert, 2007. "Random Effects Modeling Approaches for Estimating ROC Curves from Repeated Ordinal Tests without a Gold Standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(2), pages 593-602, June.
    2. Adam Branscum & Timothy Hanson & Ian Gardner, 2008. "Bayesian non-parametric models for regional prevalence estimation," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(5), pages 567-582.
    3. Geoffrey Jones & Wesley O. Johnson, 2016. "A Bayesian Superpopulation Approach to Inference for Finite Populations Based on Imperfect Diagnostic Outcomes," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 21(2), pages 314-327, June.
    4. Carol Y. Lin & Lance A. Waller & Robert H. Lyles, 2012. "The likelihood approach for the comparison of medical diagnostic system with multiple binary tests," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(7), pages 1437-1454, December.
    5. Xin Xia & Hui-Ping Zhu & Chuan-Hua Yu & Xing-Jian Xu & Ren-Dong Li & Juan Qiu, 2013. "A Bayesian Approach to Estimate the Prevalence of Schistosomiasis japonica Infection in the Hubei Province Lake Regions, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    6. Guan-Hua Huang & Su-Mei Wang & Chung-Chu Hsu, 2011. "Optimization-Based Model Fitting for Latent Class and Latent Profile Analyses," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 584-611, October.
    7. Clara Drew & Moses Badio & Dehkontee Dennis & Lisa Hensley & Elizabeth Higgs & Michael Sneller & Mosoka Fallah & Cavan Reilly, 2023. "Simplifying the estimation of diagnostic testing accuracy over time for high specificity tests in the absence of a gold standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 1546-1558, June.
    8. Geoffrey Jones & Wesley O. Johnson & Timothy E. Hanson & Ronald Christensen, 2010. "Identifiability of Models for Multiple Diagnostic Testing in the Absence of a Gold Standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 855-863, September.
    9. Chinyereugo M Umemneku Chikere & Kevin Wilson & Sara Graziadio & Luke Vale & A Joy Allen, 2019. "Diagnostic test evaluation methodology: A systematic review of methods employed to evaluate diagnostic tests in the absence of gold standard – An update," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, October.
    10. Caitlin Ward & Grant D. Brown & Jacob J. Oleson, 2023. "An individual level infectious disease model in the presence of uncertainty from multiple, imperfect diagnostic tests," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 426-436, March.
    11. David R Blair & Kanix Wang & Svetlozar Nestorov & James A Evans & Andrey Rzhetsky, 2014. "Quantifying the Impact and Extent of Undocumented Biomedical Synonymy," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    12. Huiping Xu & Bruce A. Craig, 2009. "A Probit Latent Class Model with General Correlation Structures for Evaluating Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 1145-1155, December.
    13. Bruce D. Spencer, 2012. "When Do Latent Class Models Overstate Accuracy for Diagnostic and Other Classifiers in the Absence of a Gold Standard?," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 559-566, June.
    14. Adam J. Branscum & Dunlei Cheng & J. Jack Lee, 2015. "Testing hypotheses about medical test accuracy: considerations for design and inference," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 1106-1119, May.
    15. Liu, Wei & Zhang, Bo & Zhang, Zhiwei & Chen, Baojiang & Zhou, Xiao-Hua, 2015. "A pseudo-likelihood approach for estimating diagnostic accuracy of multiple binary medical tests," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 85-98.
    16. Gustafson Paul, 2010. "Bayesian Inference for Partially Identified Models," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-20, March.
    17. Pierre Bessière & Brandon Hayes & Fabien Filaire & Laetitia Lèbre & Timothée Vergne & Matthieu Pinson & Guillaume Croville & Jean-Luc Guerin, 2023. "Optimizing environmental viral surveillance: bovine serum albumin increases RT-qPCR sensitivity for high pathogenicity avian influenza H5Nx virus detection from dust samples," Post-Print hal-04335181, HAL.
    18. Bo Zhang & Zhen Chen & Paul S. Albert, 2012. "Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy of Raters Without a Gold Standard by Exploiting a Group of Experts," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1294-1302, December.
    19. Elizabeth R. Brown, 2010. "Bayesian Estimation of the Time-Varying Sensitivity of a Diagnostic Test with Application to Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 1266-1274, December.
    20. Pankaj Patel & Sherry Thatcher & Katerina Bezrukova, 2013. "Organizationally-relevant configurations: the value of modeling local dependence," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 287-311, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0262944. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.