The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bivariate Random Effects Meta-Analysis of ROC Curves
Abstract
Meta-analysis of receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-curve data is often done with fixed-effects models, which suffer many shortcomings. Some random-effects models have been proposed to execute a meta-analysis of ROC-curve data, but these models are not often used in practice. Straightforward modeling techniques for multivariate random-effects meta-analysis of ROC-curve data are needed. The 1st aim of this article is to present a practical method that addresses the drawbacks of the fixedeffects summary ROC (SROC) method of Littenberg and Moses. Sensitivities and specificities are analyzed simultaneously using a bivariate random-effects model. The 2nd aim is to show that other SROC curves can also be derived from the bivariate model through different characterizations of the estimated bivariate normal distribution. Thereby the authors show that the bivariate random-effects approach not only extends the SROC approach but also provides a unifying framework for other approaches. The authors bring the statistical meta-analysis of ROC-curve data back into a framework of relatively standard multivariate meta-analysis with random effects. The analyses were carried out using the software package SAS (Proc NLMIXED).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research
GLASS, G. V. (1976) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x005010003 · Cited by 4,890
Reitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W. S., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 · Cited by 3,369
Systematic Review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated
Thompson, S. G. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6965.1351 · Cited by 1,017
A bivariate approach to meta-analysis
Van Houwelingen, H. C., Zwinderman, K. H., & Stijnen, T. (1993) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780122405 · Cited by 327
Self-citationA multivariate mixed linear model for meta-analysis.
Kalaian, H. A., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.3.227 · Cited by 229
Cited by
Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy
Leeflang, M. M. G., Deeks, J. J., Gatsonis, C., & Bossuyt, P. M. M. (2008) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-149-12-200812160-00008 · Cited by 1,124
Multivariate meta-analysis for non-linear and other multi-parameter associations
Gasparrini, A., Armstrong, B., & Kenward, M. G. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5471 · Cited by 772
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy
(2023) · doi:10.1002/9781119756194 · Cited by 757
Stijnen, T., Hamza, T. H., & Özdemir, P. (2010) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4040 · Cited by 757
Self-citation-D-Glucan Assay for the Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Infections: A Meta-analysis
Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Vouloumanou, E. K., Ntziora, F., Michalopoulos, A., Rafailidis, P. I., & Falagas, M. E. (2011) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciq206 · Cited by 538
Metadata
- Authors
- Arends, L. R., Hamza, T. H., van Houwelingen, J. C., Heijenbrok-Kal, M. H., Hunink, M. G. M., & Stijnen, T.
- Venue
- Medical Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-06-30
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 621-638
- ISSN
- 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-681X
- OpenAlex
- W2096014593
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 4.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bivariate Random Effects Meta-Analysis of ROC Curves. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0272989x08319957
- The paper
- Arends, L. R., Hamza, T. H., van Houwelingen, J. C., Heijenbrok-Kal, M. H., Hunink, M. G. M., & Stijnen, T. (2008). Bivariate Random Effects Meta-Analysis of ROC Curves. Medical Decision Making. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x08319957
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.