Literature DB >> 28627112

Asymptotic distribution of ∆AUC, NRIs, and IDI based on theory of U-statistics.

Olga V Demler1, Michael J Pencina2, Nancy R Cook1, Ralph B D'Agostino3.   

Abstract

The change in area under the curve (∆AUC), the integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and net reclassification index (NRI) are commonly used measures of risk prediction model performance. Some authors have reported good validity of associated methods of estimating their standard errors (SE) and construction of confidence intervals, whereas others have questioned their performance. To address these issues, we unite the ∆AUC, IDI, and three versions of the NRI under the umbrella of the U-statistics family. We rigorously show that the asymptotic behavior of ∆AUC, NRIs, and IDI fits the asymptotic distribution theory developed for U-statistics. We prove that the ∆AUC, NRIs, and IDI are asymptotically normal, unless they compare nested models under the null hypothesis. In the latter case, asymptotic normality and existing SE estimates cannot be applied to ∆AUC, NRIs, or IDI. In the former case, SE formulas proposed in the literature are equivalent to SE formulas obtained from U-statistics theory if we ignore adjustment for estimated parameters. We use Sukhatme-Randles-deWet condition to determine when adjustment for estimated parameters is necessary. We show that adjustment is not necessary for SEs of the ∆AUC and two versions of the NRI when added predictor variables are significant and normally distributed. The SEs of the IDI and three-category NRI should always be adjusted for estimated parameters. These results allow us to define when existing formulas for SE estimates can be used and when resampling methods such as the bootstrap should be used instead when comparing nested models. We also use the U-statistic theory to develop a new SE estimate of ∆AUC.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AUC; IDI; NRI; U-statistics; risk prediction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28627112      PMCID: PMC5931715          DOI: 10.1002/sim.7333

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  23 in total

1.  Novel metrics for evaluating improvement in discrimination: net reclassification and integrated discrimination improvement for normal variables and nested models.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Olga V Demler
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  What to expect from net reclassification improvement with three categories.

Authors:  Karol M Pencina; Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-08-31       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories.

Authors:  P W Wilson; R B D'Agostino; D Levy; A M Belanger; H Silbershatz; W B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1998-05-12       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Testing for improvement in prediction model performance.

Authors:  Margaret Sullivan Pepe; Kathleen F Kerr; Gary Longton; Zheyu Wang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually.

Authors:  M H Gail; L A Brinton; D P Byar; D K Corle; S B Green; C Schairer; J J Mulvihill
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1989-12-20       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Regression modelling strategies for improved prognostic prediction.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; R M Califf; D B Pryor; R A Rosati
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1984 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  A bias-corrected net reclassification improvement for clinical subgroups.

Authors:  Nina P Paynter; Nancy R Cook
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Mark Cobain; Joseph M Massaro; William B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 10.  Net reclassification indices for evaluating risk prediction instruments: a critical review.

Authors:  Kathleen F Kerr; Zheyu Wang; Holly Janes; Robyn L McClelland; Bruce M Psaty; Margaret S Pepe
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.822

View more
  8 in total

1.  Measures for evaluation of prognostic improvement under multivariate normality for nested and nonnested models.

Authors:  Danielle M Enserro; Olga V Demler; Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Quantifying diagnostic accuracy improvement of new biomarkers for competing risk outcomes.

Authors:  Zheng Wang; Yu Cheng; Eric C Seaberg; James T Becker
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 5.279

3.  Quantifying the added value of new biomarkers: how and how not.

Authors:  Nancy R Cook
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2018-07-11

4.  Prediction of Cardiovascular Events by Type I Central Systolic Blood Pressure: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Florence Lamarche; Mohsen Agharazii; François Madore; Rémi Goupil
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2020-12-14       Impact factor: 10.190

5.  Number of Positive Lymph Nodes Combined with the Logarithmic Ratio of Positive Lymph Nodes predicts Survival in Patients with Non-Metastatic Larynx Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Qiyue Wang; Zhuo Tan; Chuanming Zheng; Jiafeng Wang; Guowan Zheng; Ping Huang; Yiwen Zhang; Minghua Ge
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 4.207

6.  Serine Protease Inhibitor Kazal Type 1, A Potential Biomarker for the Early Detection, Targeting, and Prediction of Response to Immune Checkpoint Blockade Therapies in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Jianlong Jia; Latai Ga; Yang Liu; Zhiyi Yang; Yue Wang; Xuanze Guo; Ruichen Ma; Ruonan Liu; Tianyou Li; Zeyao Tang; Jun Wang
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 8.786

7.  A Prediction Nomogram Combining Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Other Clinical Parameters to Predict Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Patients with Hypertension.

Authors:  Lin Wang; Dongsheng Sun; Jianhong Xie; Li Zhang; Dibo Lao; Shaokun Xu
Journal:  Int J Hypertens       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 2.434

8.  Preoperative positive urine nitrite and albumin-globulin ratio are independent risk factors for predicting postoperative fever after retrograde Intrarenal surgery based on a retrospective cohort.

Authors:  Zhong-Yu Jian; Yu-Cheng Ma; Ran Liu; Hong Li; Kunjie Wang
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 2.264

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.