Evaluating health risk models

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 23, 2010, Pages 2438-2452

  Whittemore, Alice S ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Absolute risk; Brier score; Calibration; Concordance; Discrimination; Personalized disease prevention; Precision; Resolution; Risk model

Indexed keywords

ESTRADIOL;

ARTICLE; BLOOD; BREAST TUMOR; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; POSTMENOPAUSE; PREVALENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; ESTRADIOL; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; POSTMENOPAUSE; PREVALENCE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 79952118591     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3991     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Cook NR. Statistical evaluation of prognostic versus diagnostic models: beyond the ROC curve. Clinical Chemistry 2008; 54:17-23.
2. Pepe MS, Feng Z, Anes H, Bossuyt PM, Potter JD. Pivotal evaluation of the accuracy of a biomarker used for classification or prediction: standards for study design. Journal of National Cancer Institute 2008; 100:1432-1438.
3. Janes H, Pepe MS, Gu W. Assessing the value of risk predictions by using risk stratification tables. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008; 149:751-760.
4. Pepe MS, Gu JW, Morris DE. The potential of genes and other markers to inform about risk. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 2010; 19:655-665.
5. Huang Y, Pepe MS. A parametric ROC model-based approach for evaluating the predictiveness of continuous markers in case-control studies. Biometrics 2009; 65:1133-1144.
6. Cook NR. Comments on 'Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond'. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:191-195.
7. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Schairer C, Mutvihill JJ. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. Journal of National Cancer Institute 1989; 81:1879-1886.
8. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, Redmond CK, Kavanah M, Cronin WM, Vogel V, Robidoux A, Dimitrov N, Atkins J, Daly M, Wieand S, Tan-Chiu E, Ford L, Wolmark N. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. Journal of National Cancer Institute 1998; 90:1371-1388.
9. Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, Daniel BL, Ikeda DM, Stockdale FE, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of the American Medical Association 2006; 295:2374-2384.
10. Brier GW. Verification of forecasts expressed in terms of probability. Monthly Weather Review 1950; 78:1-3.
11. Murphy AH. A new vector partition of the probability score. Journal of Applied Meteorology 1973; 12:595-600.
12. Yates JF. External correspondence: decompositions of the mean probability score. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 1982; 30:132-156.
13. Wilks DS. Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences. Academic Press: London, 1995.
14. Hu B, Palta M, Shao J. Properties of R(2) statistics for logistic regression. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:1383-1395.
15. Gail MH, Pfeiffer RM. On criteria for evaluating models of absolute risk. Biostatistics 2005; 6:227-239.
16. Hsu WR, Murphy AH. The attributes diagram A geometrical framework for assessing the quality of probability forecasts. International Journal of Forecasting 1986; 2:285-293.
17. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Goodness of fit tests for the multiple logistic regression model. Communications in Statistics 1980; 9:1043-1069.
18. Pepe MS. The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2003.
19. Pepe MS, Feng Z, Gu JW. Comments on 'Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond'. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:173-181.
20. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143:29-36.
21. Pencina MJ, D'Agostino Sr RB, D'Agostino Jr RB, Vasan RS. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:157-172.
22. Cook NR. Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction. Circulation 2007; 115:928-935.
23. Ridker PM, Buring JE, Rifar N, Cook N. Development and validation of improved algorithms for the assessment of global cardiovascular risk in women. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007; 297:611-619.
24. Pepe MS, Janes HE. Gauging the performance of SNPs, biomarkers, and clinical factors for predicting risk of breast cancer. Journal of National Cancer Institute 2008; 100:978-979.
25. Graf E, Schmoor C, Sauerbrei W, Schumacher M. Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data. Statistics in Medicine 1999; 18:2529-2545.
26. Diamond GA. What price perfection? Calibration and discrimination of clinical prediction models. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1992; 45:85-89.
27. Chen J, Pee D, Ayyagari R, Graubard B, Schairer C, Byrne C, Benichou J, Gail MH. Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density. Journal of National Cancer Institute 2006; 98:1215-1226.
28. Gail MH. Discriminatory accuracy from single-nucleotide polymorphisms in models to predict breast cancer risk. Journal of National Cancer Institute 2008; 100:1037-1041.
29. Cook NR, Ridker PM. Advances in measuring the effect of individual predictors of cardiovascular risk: the role of reclassification measures. Annals of Internal Medicine 2009; 150:795-802.
30. Rosner B, Colditz GA, Iglehart JD, Hankinson SE. Risk prediction models with incomplete data with application to prediction of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: prospective data from the Nurses' Health Study. Breast Cancer Res 2008; 10:R55.
31. Greenland P, Lloyd-Jones D. Defining a rational approach to screening for cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic patients. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2008; 52:330-332.
32. Greenland P, Bonow RO, Brundage BH, Budoff MJ, Eisenberg MJ, Grundy SM, Lauer MS, Post WS, Raggi P, Redberg RF, Rodgers GP, Shaw LJ, Taylor AJ, Weintraub WS. American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography); Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention; Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. ACCF/AHA 2007 clinical expert consensus document on coronary artery calcium scoring by computed tomography in global cardiovascular risk assessment and in evaluation of patients with chest pain: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography) developed in collaboration with the Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2007; 49:378-402.
33. Arias E. United States Life Tables 2004. National Vital Statistics Reports 2007; 56:1-39.