Robust metrics for assessing the performance of different verbal autopsy cause assignment methods in validation studies

被引:62
作者
Murray, Christopher J. L. [1 ]
Lozano, Rafael [1 ]
Flaxman, Abraham D. [1 ]
Vahdatpour, Alireza [1 ]
Lopez, Alan D. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Inst Hlth Metr & Evaluat, Seattle, WA 98121 USA
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Populat Hlth, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
关键词
Verbal autopsy; metrics; validation; ADULT DEATHS; MORTALITY FRACTIONS; ASSIGNING CAUSES; INTERVA; ALGORITHMS; PREDICTION; ACCURACY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1186/1478-7954-9-28
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
100235 [预防医学];
摘要
Background: Verbal autopsy (VA) is an important method for obtaining cause of death information in settings without vital registration and medical certification of causes of death. An array of methods, including physician review and computer-automated methods, have been proposed and used. Choosing the best method for VA requires the appropriate metrics for assessing performance. Currently used metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and cause-specific mortality fraction (CSMF) errors do not provide a robust basis for comparison. Methods: We use simple simulations of populations with three causes of death to demonstrate that most metrics used in VA validation studies are extremely sensitive to the CSMF composition of the test dataset. Simulations also demonstrate that an inferior method can appear to have better performance than an alternative due strictly to the CSMF composition of the test set. Results: VA methods need to be evaluated across a set of test datasets with widely varying CSMF compositions. We propose two metrics for assessing the performance of a proposed VA method. For assessing how well a method does at individual cause of death assignment, we recommend the average chance-corrected concordance across causes. This metric is insensitive to the CSMF composition of the test sets and corrects for the degree to which a method will get the cause correct due strictly to chance. For the evaluation of CSMF estimation, we propose CSMF accuracy. CSMF accuracy is defined as one minus the sum of all absolute CSMF errors across causes divided by the maximum total error. It is scaled from zero to one and can generalize a method's CSMF estimation capability regardless of the number of causes. Performance of a VA method for CSMF estimation by cause can be assessed by examining the relationship across test datasets between the estimated CSMF and the true CSMF. Conclusions: With an increasing range of VA methods available, it will be critical to objectively assess their performance in assigning cause of death. Chance-corrected concordance and CSMF accuracy assessed across a large number of test datasets with widely varying CSMF composition provide a robust strategy for this assessment.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]
Agresti A., 2019, An introduction to categorical data analysis, V3rd
[2]
Assessing the accuracy of prediction algorithms for classification: an overview [J].
Baldi, P ;
Brunak, S ;
Chauvin, Y ;
Andersen, CAF ;
Nielsen, H .
BIOINFORMATICS, 2000, 16 (05) :412-424
[3]
A case study of using artificial neural networks for classifying cause of death from verbal autopsy [J].
Boulle, A ;
Chandramohan, D ;
Weller, P .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2001, 30 (03) :515-520
[4]
Refining a probabilistic model for interpreting verbal autopsy data [J].
Byass, P ;
Fottrell, E ;
Huong, DL ;
Berhane, Y ;
Corrah, T ;
Kahn, K ;
Muhe, L ;
Van, DD .
SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2006, 34 (01) :26-31
[5]
A probabilistic approach to interpreting verbal autopsies: methodology and preliminary validation in Vietnam [J].
Byass, P ;
Huong, DL ;
Minh, HV .
SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2003, 31 :32-37
[6]
Moving from Data on Deaths to Public Health Policy in Agincourt, South Africa: Approaches to Analysing and Understanding Verbal Autopsy Findings [J].
Byass, Peter ;
Kahn, Kathleen ;
Fottrell, Edward ;
Collinson, Mark A. ;
Tollman, Stephen M. .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (08)
[7]
VERBAL AUTOPSIES FOR ADULT DEATHS - ISSUES IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION [J].
CHANDRAMOHAN, D ;
MAUDE, GH ;
RODRIGUES, LC ;
HAYES, RJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1994, 23 (02) :213-222
[8]
Effect of misclassification of causes of death in verbal autopsy: can it be adjusted? [J].
Chandramohan, D ;
Setel, P ;
Quigley, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2001, 30 (03) :509-514
[9]
Assessing a new approach to verbal autopsy interpretation in a rural Ethiopian community:: the InterVA model [J].
Fantahun, M ;
Fottrell, E ;
Berhane, Y ;
Wall, S ;
Högberg, U ;
Byass, P .
BULLETIN OF THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, 2006, 84 (03) :204-210
[10]
Direct estimation of cause-specific mortality fractions from verbal autopsies: multisite validation study using clinical diagnostic gold standards [J].
Flaxman, Abraham D. ;
Vahdatpour, Alireza ;
James, Spencer L. ;
Birnbaum, Jeanette K. ;
Murray, Christopher J. L. .
POPULATION HEALTH METRICS, 2011, 9