Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Confirmation Biases01:31

Confirmation Biases

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Strategies of Self-Presentation II: Self-Verification01:17

Strategies of Self-Presentation II: Self-Verification

Self-verification is a fundamental psychological drive wherein individuals seek affirmation of their self-concept from others, striving for consistency between their internal self-view and external perceptions. This drive operates even when the self-concept is negative, influencing interpersonal behavior and feedback preferences in complex and often counterintuitive ways. Unlike the self-enhancement motive, which seeks positive evaluations, self-verification prioritizes coherence and...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Data Validation01:15

Data Validation

Method validation is a crucial process in analytical chemistry designed to confirm that a given method consistently produces reliable and high-quality results. This process is essential when a method is applied to different sample matrices or when procedural modifications are made, ensuring that the results meet acceptable standards across various applications.
Key parameters for method validation include:
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Sparse Canonical Correlation Analysis for Multiple Measurements With Latent Trajectories.

Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift·2025
Same author

Estimating overall survival of glioblastoma patients using clinical variables, tumor size, and location.

Neuro-oncology advances·2025
Same author

Identifying Predictors for Heart Failure Outcomes in Phospholamban p.(Arg14del)-Positive Individuals.

JACC. Heart failure·2025
Same author

Application of image guided analyses to monitor fecal microbial composition and diversity in a human cohort.

Scientific reports·2025
Same author

Aortic Function in a Longitudinal 4D Flow MRI Study in Marfan Syndrome Patients Receiving Resveratrol.

Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI·2025
Same author

Cohort Profile Update: The Healthy Life in an Urban Setting (HELIUS) Study.

International journal of epidemiology·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 6, 2026

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm
09:49

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm

Published on: December 24, 2015

Correcting for partial verification bias: a comparison of methods.

Joris A H de Groot1, Kristel J M Janssen, Aeilko H Zwinderman

  • 1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. J.degroot-17@umcutrecht.nl

Annals of Epidemiology
|November 27, 2010
PubMed
Summary

Accurate diagnostic research requires addressing missing reference data. Multiple imputation and the Begg and Greenes method effectively correct accuracy measures, with multiple imputation recommended for complex missing data scenarios.

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 6, 2026

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm
09:49

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm

Published on: December 24, 2015

Area of Science:

  • Medical research methodology
  • Biostatistics
  • Diagnostic accuracy studies

Background:

  • Partial verification of reference standards is a common issue in diagnostic research.
  • Uncorrected missing data can lead to biased accuracy measures for diagnostic tests.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the performance of multiple imputation and the Begg and Greenes correction method.
  • To compare these methods under various partial verification scenarios.

Main Methods:

  • Simulations were conducted using a deep venous thrombosis dataset (n=1292).
  • Reference standard outcomes were intentionally set as missing based on different mechanisms and proportions.
  • The performance of correction methods was compared.

Main Results:

  • Both Begg and Greenes method and multiple imputation accurately adjust accuracy measures when the missing data mechanism is known.
  • Multiple imputation is recommended for situations with complex or unknown missing data mechanisms.

Conclusions:

  • The evaluated methods are applicable to both continuous and categorical variables.
  • These correction techniques are accessible in standard statistical software.
  • Reliable estimates for missing reference data can be obtained.