BackgroundIn many clinical biomarker studies, Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) is commonly used to assess the level of agreement of a biomarker measured under two different conditions. However, measurement of a specific biomarker typically cannot provide accurate numerical values below the lower limit of detection (LLD) of the assay, which results in left-censored data. Most researchers discard the data below the LLD or apply simple data imputation methods in the presence of left-censored data, such as replacing values below the LLD with a fixed number less than or equal to the LLD. This is not statistically optimal, because it often leads to biased estimates and overestimates the precision.MethodsWe describe a simple method using a bivariate normal distribution in this situation and apply SAS statistical software to arrive at the maximum likelihood (ML) estimate of the parameters and construct the estimate of the CCC. We conduct a computer simulation study to investigate the statistical properties of the ML method versus the data deletion and simple data imputation method. We also contrast the methods with real data using two urine biomarkers, Interleukin 18 and Cystatin C.ResultsThe computer simulation studies confirm that the ML procedure is superior to the data deletion and simple data imputation procedures. In all of the simulated scenarios, the ML method yields the smallest relative bias and the highest percentage of the 95% confidence intervals that include the true value of the CCC. In the first simulation scenario (sample size of 100 paired data points, 25% left-censoring for both members of the pair, true CCC of 0.238), the relative bias is −1.43% for the ML method, −40.97% for the data deletion method, and it ranges between −12.94% and −21.72% for the simple data imputation methods. Similarly, when the left-censoring for one of the members of the data pairs increases from 25% to 40%, the relative bias displays the same pattern for all methods.ConclusionsWhen estimating the CCC from paired biomarker data in the presence of left-censored values, the ML method works better than data deletion and simple data imputation methods.
Articles reporting research may be full length or brief reports. These should report original research findings within the journal's scope. Papers should generally be a maximum of 4000 words in length, excluding tables, references, abstract and key points of the article, whilst references should not exceed 36. Review PapersComprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope. Review articles provide a review of the literature. There are two types of review papers:-systematic review papers: respond to a specific research question, accrue from criterion-based selection of sources, include a quantitative synthesis that includes a statistical method (meta-analysis) and should adhere to PRISMA guidelines. Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity should be noted in methods section. -narrative reviews: the research question may be broad, and the scope of this review is to discuss a specific topic and keep the readers up-to-date about it. This type of review does not necessarily include a methodological approach and its synthesis is usually qualitative. Narrative reviews should include a "developments" section, with details regarding data sources used, keywords applied, time restrictions and study types selected. All review papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and references. References should not exceed 50 unless on a topic that has an extensive evidence base. The conclusion of the reviews must be specific and stem from the findings. Short ReportsBrief reports of data from original research. Short reports are shorter versions of original articles, may include one table or figure, should not exceed 1500 words and 15 references. Short reports are suitable for the presentation of research that extends previously published research, including the reporting of additional evidence and confirmatory results in other settings, as well as negative results. Authors must clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building, both published and unpublished. Study ProtocolsArticles describing a research protocol of a study. This article type can be for proposed or for ongoing research and should contain the background, research hypothesis, rationale a detailed methodology of the study. The SPIRIT 2013 Checklist guidelines ideally should be applied. Study protocols submitted for publication must have received ethics approval. Protocols of randomized trials should follow the CONSORT guidelines and must have a trial registration number, while observational studies should follow STROBE guidelines. Methodology PapersPapers that present different methodological approaches that can be used to investigate problems in a relevant scientific field and to encourage innovation. It is suggested that case studies or practical examples, which can be existing ones, are included to demonstrate the consistency and applicability of the methodology. Methodology papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and referen...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.