Literature DB >> 8347742

How well do prediction equations predict? Using receiver operating characteristic curves and accuracy curves to compare validity and generalizability.

D Katz1, B Foxman.   

Abstract

Although morbidity and mortality prediction equations are widely used in planning, clinical practice, and health risk appraisal, their validity and generalizability have been tested only in a limited way. Previous attempts lacked an absolute standard of performance and looked only at the equations' ability to predict who would become ill (sensitivity), not the equally important ability to predict who would remain healthy (specificity). We compared six all-cause mortality prediction equations using receiver operating characteristic curves and accuracy curves, which overcome the limitations of earlier methods and provide a concise visual representation of the results. We used equations from five prospective studies conducted in the United States (Tecumseh at 8 and 12 years of follow-up, Framingham, Chicago Gas, Chicago Western Electric, and Albany), each of which included cholesterol, smoking, and blood pressure as independent variables, to predict 12-year mortality in Tecumseh males age 40-54 years. Previous studies suggested that these equations predict equally well. Our analysis found that, although all predict better than chance, Albany, Chicago Western Electric, and Tecumseh at 8 years underestimate mortality. Receiver operating characteristic and accuracy curves are a promising technique for assessment of prediction equations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8347742     DOI: 10.1097/00001648-199307000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiology        ISSN: 1044-3983            Impact factor:   4.822


  9 in total

1.  Improved comorbidity adjustment for predicting mortality in Medicare populations.

Authors:  Sebastian Schneeweiss; Philip S Wang; Jerry Avorn; Robert J Glynn
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Expectations from different perspectives on future work outcome of young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Authors:  Anja Holwerda; Sandra Brouwer; Michiel R de Boer; Johan W Groothoff; Jac J L van der Klink
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2015-03

3.  Hypothermic endpoint for an intranasal invasive pulmonary aspergillosis mouse model.

Authors:  Trinka W Adamson; Diana Diaz-Arevalo; Tracey M Gonzalez; Xueli Liu; Markus Kalkum
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 0.982

4.  Standardized assessment of strategy use and working memory in early mental arithmetic performance.

Authors:  Sarah S Wu; Meghan L Meyer; Uta Maeda; Valorie Salimpoor; Sylvia Tomiyama; David C Geary; Vinod Menon
Journal:  Dev Neuropsychol       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.253

5.  Healthy food and nutrient index and all cause mortality.

Authors:  Christine Bazelmans; Stefaan De Henauw; Christof Matthys; Michel Dramaix; Marcel Kornitzer; Guy De Backer; Alain Levêque
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 8.082

6.  Prediction of mortality from coronary heart disease among diverse populations: is there a common predictive function?

Authors: 
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.994

7.  Predicting mortality with biomarkers: a population-based prospective cohort study for elderly Costa Ricans.

Authors:  Luis Rosero-Bixby; William H Dow
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2012-06-13

8.  Predictive accuracy of a health risk appraisal program using mortality risk age in 116,927 Korean men.

Authors:  Ju-Young Kim; Byung-Joo Park; Yoon Kim; Jin-Ho Park; Be-Long Cho
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2011-01-24       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  Predictive validity of a medication adherence measure in an outpatient setting.

Authors:  Donald E Morisky; Alfonso Ang; Marie Krousel-Wood; Harry J Ward
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.885

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.