Abstract
In medicine we often want to compare two different methods of measuring some quantity, such as blood pressure, gestational age, or cardiac stroke volume. Sometimes we compare an approximate or simple method with a very precise one. This is a calibration problem, and we shall not discuss it further here. Frequently, however, we cannot regard either method as giving the true value of the quantity being measured. In this case we want to know whether the methods give answers which are, in some sense, comparable. For example, we may wish to see whether a new, cheap and quick method produces answers that agree with those from an established method sufficiently well for clinical purposes. Many such studies, using a variety of statistical techniques, have been reported. Yet few really answer the question “Do the two methods of measurement agree sufficiently closely?” In this paper we shall describe what is usually done, show why this is inappropriate, suggest a better approach, and ask why such studies are done so badly. We will restrict our consideration to the comparison of two methods of measuring a continuous variable, although similar problems can arise with categorical variables.
Keywords
StatisticsMathematicsComputer science
Related Publications
Accounting for Uncertainty in the Tree Topology Has Little Effect on the Decision-Theoretic Approach to Model Selection in Phylogeny Estimation
Currently available methods for model selection used in phylogenetic analysis are based on an initial fixed-tree topology. Once a model is picked based on this topology, a rigor...
Causal Variables, Indicator Variables and Measurement Scales: An Example from Quality of Life
Summary There is extensive literature on the development and validation of multi-item measurement scales. Much of this is based on principles derived from psychometric theory an...
Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior.
Drawing from recent developments in social cognition, cognitive psychology, and behavioral decision theory, we analyzed when and how the act of measuring beliefs, attitudes, int...
A Direct Approach to False Discovery Rates
Summary Multiple-hypothesis testing involves guarding against much more complicated errors than single-hypothesis testing. Whereas we typically control the type I error rate for...
Cases in which Parsimony or Compatibility Methods will be Positively Misleading
For some simple three- and four-species cases involving a character with two states, it is determined under what conditions several methods of phylogenetic inference will fail t...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1983
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 307-307
- Citations
- 4288
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
4288
OpenAlex
Cite This
Douglas G. Altman,
John M. Bland
(1983).
Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies.
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician)
, 32
(3)
, 307-307.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2987937
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.2307/2987937