Abstract

BackgroundThe performance of risk prediction models is often characterized in terms of discrimination and calibration. The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve is widely used for evaluating model discrimination. However, when comparing ROC curves across different samples, the effect of case mix makes the interpretation of discrepancies difficult. Further, compared with model discrimination, evaluating model calibration has not received the same level of attention. Current methods for examining model calibration require specification of smoothing or grouping factors.MethodsWe introduce the “model-based” ROC curve (mROC) to assess model calibration and the effect of case mix during external validation. The mROC curve is the ROC curve that should be observed if the prediction model is calibrated in the external population. We show that calibration-in-the-large and the equivalence of mROC and ROC curves are together sufficient conditions for the model to be calibrated. Based on this, we propose a novel statistical test for calibration that, unlike current methods, does not require any subjective specification of smoothing or grouping factors.ResultsThrough a stylized example, we demonstrate how mROC separates the effect of case mix and model miscalibration when externally validating a risk prediction model. We present the results of simulation studies that confirm the properties of the new calibration test. A case study on predicting the risk of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease puts the developments in a practical context. R code for the implementation of this method is provided.ConclusionmROC can easily be constructed and used to interpret the effect of case mix and calibration on the ROC plot. Given the popularity of ROC curves among applied investigators, this framework can further promote assessment of model calibration.HighlightsCompared with examining model discrimination, examining model calibration has not received the same level of attention among investigators who develop or examine risk prediction models.This article introduces the model-based ROC (mROC) curve as the basis for graphical and statistical examination of model calibration on the ROC plot.This article introduces a formal statistical test based on mROC for examining model calibration that does not require arbitrary smoothing or grouping factors.Investigators who develop or validate risk prediction models can now also use the popular ROC plot for examining model calibration, as a critical but often neglected component in predictive analytics.

Highlights

  • The performance of risk prediction models is often characterized in terms of discrimination and calibration

  • We show that the model-based ROC (mROC) connects receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, a classical means of evaluating model discrimination, to model calibration

  • With the help of a stylized example, we demonstrate how the mROC enables investigators to disentangle the effect of case mix and model validity on the shape of the ROC curve

Read more

Summary

Background

Risk prediction models that objectively quantify the probability of clinically important events based on observable characteristics are critical tools for efficient patient care. Our main interest is in the ‘‘external validation’’ context, in which a previously developed risk prediction model for a binary outcome is applied to a new independent (external) sample to examine its performance in that sample’s target population. Unless otherwise specified, by ‘‘calibration’’ we refer to moderate calibration (i.e., PðY = 1jpÃ(X) = pÞ = p) Applying this model to the external sample consisting of a ranÀdom samÁple of n individuals, we obtain pà = pÃ1, . Á (1 1 pÃi pÃi ) : one can generate a ‘‘model-based’’ ROC or mROCnðtÞ, independently of the observed outcomes in the external sample, based on the CDFs F1n Àand F0Án obtained by with weights aovfepraÃig=inPg the pÃi indicator and (1 À pfuÃi )n=ctPion(s1. The limiting forms (population equations) of the estimated CDFs F1n, F0n, F1n, and F0n are derived in

Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call