IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v172y2009i4p729-748.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using relative utility curves to evaluate risk prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Stuart G. Baker
  • Nancy R. Cook
  • Andrew Vickers
  • Barnett S. Kramer

Abstract

Summary. Because many medical decisions are based on risk prediction models that are constructed from medical history and results of tests, the evaluation of these prediction models is important. This paper makes five contributions to this evaluation: the relative utility curve which gauges the potential for better prediction in terms of utilities, without the need for a reference level for one utility, while providing a sensitivity analysis for misspecification of utilities, the relevant region, which is the set of values of prediction performance that are consistent with the recommended treatment status in the absence of prediction, the test threshold, which is the minimum number of tests that would be traded for a true positive prediction in order for the expected utility to be non‐negative, the evaluation of two‐stage predictions that reduce test costs and connections between various measures of performance of prediction. An application involving the risk of cardiovascular disease is discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Stuart G. Baker & Nancy R. Cook & Andrew Vickers & Barnett S. Kramer, 2009. "Using relative utility curves to evaluate risk prediction," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 172(4), pages 729-748, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:172:y:2009:i:4:p:729-748
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2009.00592.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2009.00592.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2009.00592.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William M. Briggs & Russell Zaretzki, 2008. "The Skill Plot: A Graphical Technique for Evaluating Continuous Diagnostic Tests," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(1), pages 250-256, March.
    2. Ying Huang & Margaret Sullivan Pepe & Ziding Feng, 2007. "Evaluating the Predictiveness of a Continuous Marker," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 1181-1188, December.
    3. Patrick J. Heagerty & Thomas Lumley & Margaret S. Pepe, 2000. "Time-Dependent ROC Curves for Censored Survival Data and a Diagnostic Marker," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 337-344, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ben Van Calster & Andrew J. Vickers, 2015. "Calibration of Risk Prediction Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(2), pages 162-169, February.
    2. Ben Van Calster & Andrew J. Vickers & Michael J. Pencina & Stuart G. Baker & Dirk Timmerman & Ewout W. Steyerberg, 2013. "Evaluation of Markers and Risk Prediction Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(4), pages 490-501, May.
    3. Mei-Cheng Wang & Shanshan Li, 2012. "Bivariate Marker Measurements and ROC Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1207-1218, December.
    4. Ying Huang & Eric Laber, 2016. "Personalized Evaluation of Biomarker Value: A Cost-Benefit Perspective," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 8(1), pages 43-65, June.
    5. Holly Janes & Margaret S. Pepe & Ying Huang, 2014. "A Framework for Evaluating Markers Used to Select Patient Treatment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(2), pages 159-167, February.
    6. Shi, Chengchun & Lu, Wenbin & Song, Rui, 2019. "A sparse random projection-based test for overall qualitative treatment effects," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102107, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Hormuzd A. Katki & Ionut Bebu, 2021. "A simple framework to identify optimal cost‐effective risk thresholds for a single screen: Comparison to Decision Curve Analysis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(3), pages 887-903, July.
    8. Baker Stuart G. & Van Calster Ben & Steyerberg Ewout W., 2012. "Evaluating a New Marker for Risk Prediction Using the Test Tradeoff: An Update," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-37, March.
    9. Stuart G. Baker, 2024. "Evaluating Risk Prediction with Data Collection Costs: Novel Estimation of Test Tradeoff Curves," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 44(1), pages 53-63, January.
    10. Ben Van Calster & Ewout W. Steyerberg & Ralph B. D’Agostino Sr & Michael J. Pencina, 2014. "Sensitivity and Specificity Can Change in Opposite Directions When New Predictive Markers Are Added to Risk Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(4), pages 513-522, May.
    11. Tracey L. Marsh & Holly Janes & Margaret S. Pepe, 2020. "Statistical inference for net benefit measures in biomarker validation studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 843-852, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tianxi Cai & Thomas A Gerds & Yingye Zheng & Jinbo Chen, 2011. "Robust Prediction of t-Year Survival with Data from Multiple Studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 436-444, June.
    2. Baker Stuart G. & Van Calster Ben & Steyerberg Ewout W., 2012. "Evaluating a New Marker for Risk Prediction Using the Test Tradeoff: An Update," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-37, March.
    3. Y. Huang & M. S. Pepe, 2009. "A Parametric ROC Model-Based Approach for Evaluating the Predictiveness of Continuous Markers in Case–Control Studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 1133-1144, December.
    4. Claire L Heslop & Gregory E Miller & John S Hill, 2009. "Neighbourhood Socioeconomics Status Predicts Non-Cardiovascular Mortality in Cardiac Patients with Access to Universal Health Care," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(1), pages 1-8, January.
    5. Chin-Tsang Chiang & Shr-Yan Huang, 2009. "Estimation for the Optimal Combination of Markers without Modeling the Censoring Distribution," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(1), pages 152-158, March.
    6. Sebastian Cremer & Lisa Pilgram & Alexander Berkowitsch & Melanie Stecher & Siegbert Rieg & Mariana Shumliakivska & Denisa Bojkova & Julian Uwe Gabriel Wagner & Galip Servet Aslan & Christoph Spinner , 2021. "Angiotensin II receptor blocker intake associates with reduced markers of inflammatory activation and decreased mortality in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and COVID-19 disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-17, October.
    7. Te-Ling Ma & Tsung-Hui Hu & Chao-Hung Hung & Jing-Houng Wang & Sheng-Nan Lu & Chien-Hung Chen, 2019. "Incidence and predictors of retreatment in chronic hepatitis B patients after discontinuation of entecavir or tenofovir treatment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Liu Xinhua & Jin Zhezhen, 2009. "A Non-Parametric Approach to Scale Reduction for Uni-Dimensional Screening Scales," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-22, January.
    9. Yingye Zheng & Patrick Heagerty, 2004. "Semiparametric Estimation of Time-Dependent: ROC Curves for Longitudinal Marker Data," UW Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1052, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    10. Yuanjia Wang & Huaihou Chen & Runze Li & Naihua Duan & Roberto Lewis-Fernández, 2011. "Prediction-Based Structured Variable Selection through the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 896-905, September.
    11. Shannon M Lynch & Elizabeth Handorf & Kristen A Sorice & Elizabeth Blackman & Lisa Bealin & Veda N Giri & Elias Obeid & Camille Ragin & Mary Daly, 2020. "The effect of neighborhood social environment on prostate cancer development in black and white men at high risk for prostate cancer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Nir Y. Krakauer & Jesse C. Krakauer, 2021. "Association of X-ray Absorptiometry Body Composition Measurements with Basic Anthropometrics and Mortality Hazard," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-13, July.
    13. Weining Shen & Jing Ning & Ying Yuan, 2015. "A direct method to evaluate the time-dependent predictive accuracy for biomarkers," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 439-449, June.
    14. Matthias Schmid & Thomas Hielscher & Thomas Augustin & Olaf Gefeller, 2011. "A Robust Alternative to the Schemper–Henderson Estimator of Prediction Error," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 524-535, June.
    15. Si Cheng & Kathleen F Kerr & Heather Thiessen-Philbrook & Steven G Coca & Chirag R Parikh, 2020. "BioPETsurv: Methodology and open source software to evaluate biomarkers for prognostic enrichment of time-to-event clinical trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-11, September.
    16. Tim Johnson & Valen Johnson, 2004. "A Bayesian Hierarchical Approach to Multirater Correlated ROC Analysis," The University of Michigan Department of Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1027, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    17. P. Saha & P. J. Heagerty, 2010. "Time-Dependent Predictive Accuracy in the Presence of Competing Risks," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 999-1011, December.
    18. Lori E. Dodd, 2010. "ROC Curves for Continuous Data by KRZANOWSKI, W. J. and HAND, D. J," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 657-658, June.
    19. Janez Stare & Maja Pohar Perme & Robin Henderson, 2011. "A Measure of Explained Variation for Event History Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 750-759, September.
    20. Minta Thomas & Yu-Ru Su & Elisabeth A. Rosenthal & Lori C. Sakoda & Stephanie L. Schmit & Maria N. Timofeeva & Zhishan Chen & Ceres Fernandez-Rozadilla & Philip J. Law & Neil Murphy & Robert Carreras-, 2023. "Combining Asian and European genome-wide association studies of colorectal cancer improves risk prediction across racial and ethnic populations," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:172:y:2009:i:4:p:729-748. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.