Meta-analysis of the technical performance of an imaging procedure: Guidelines and statistical methodology Journal Article


Authors: Huang, E. P.; Wang, X. F.; Choudhury, K. R.; McShane, L. M.; Gönen, M.; Ye, J.; Buckler, A. J.; Kinahan, P. E.; Reeves, A. P.; Jackson, E. F.; Guimaraes, A. R.; Zahlmann, G.; for the Meta-Analysis Working Group
Article Title: Meta-analysis of the technical performance of an imaging procedure: Guidelines and statistical methodology
Abstract: Medical imaging serves many roles in patient care and the drug approval process, including assessing treatment response and guiding treatment decisions. These roles often involve a quantitative imaging biomarker, an objectively measured characteristic of the underlying anatomic structure or biochemical process derived from medical images. Before a quantitative imaging biomarker is accepted for use in such roles, the imaging procedure to acquire it must undergo evaluation of its technical performance, which entails assessment of performance metrics such as repeatability and reproducibility of the quantitative imaging biomarker. Ideally, this evaluation will involve quantitative summaries of results from multiple studies to overcome limitations due to the typically small sample sizes of technical performance studies and/or to include a broader range of clinical settings and patient populations. This paper is a review of meta-analysis procedures for such an evaluation, including identification of suitable studies, statistical methodology to evaluate and summarize the performance metrics, and complete and transparent reporting of the results. This review addresses challenges typical of meta-analyses of technical performance, particularly small study sizes, which often causes violations of assumptions underlying standard meta-analysis techniques. Alternative approaches to address these difficulties are also presented; simulation studies indicate that they outperform standard techniques when some studies are small. The meta-analysis procedures presented are also applied to actual [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) test-retest repeatability data for illustrative purposes. © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.
Keywords: review; research design; positron emission tomography; methodology; reproducibility; biomarkers; biological marker; reproducibility of results; statistics; practice guideline; diagnostic imaging; confidence interval; systematic review; quantitative analysis; medical research; statistics as topic; quantitative imaging; meta-analysis as topic; test retest reliability; normal distribution; guidelines as topic; meta-analysis; meta analysis (topic); repeatability; maximum likelihood method; systematic review (topic); meta-regression; humans; human; imaging biomarkers; technical performance
Journal Title: Statistical Methods in Medical Research
Volume: 24
Issue: 1
ISSN: 0962-2802
Publisher: Sage Publications  
Date Published: 2015-02-01
Start Page: 141
End Page: 174
Language: English
DOI: 10.1177/0962280214537394
PUBMED: 24872353
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC5226954
DOI/URL:
Notes: Review -- Export Date: 25 January 2017 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Mithat Gonen
    1028 Gonen