Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

The International Journal of Biostatistics

Ed. by Chambaz, Antoine / Hubbard, Alan E. / van der Laan, Mark J.

2 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2015: 0.667
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.188

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.495
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.180
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.319

Mathematical Citation Quotient (MCQ) 2015: 0.04

See all formats and pricing
In This Section

Evaluating a New Marker for Risk Prediction Using the Test Tradeoff: An Update

Stuart G. Baker
  • National Cancer Institute
/ Ben Van Calster
  • Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Erasmus MC
/ Ewout W. Steyerberg
  • Erasmus MC
Published Online: 2012-03-22 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/1557-4679.1395

Most of the methodological literature on evaluating an additional marker for risk prediction involves purely statistical measures of classification performance. A disadvantage of a purely statistical measure is the difficulty in deciding the improvement in the measure that would make inclusion of the additional marker worthwhile. In contrast, a medical decision making approach can weigh the cost or harm of ascertaining an additional marker against the benefit of a higher true positive rate for a given false positive rate that may be associated with risk prediction involving the additional marker. An appealing form of the medical decision making approach involves the risk threshold, which is the risk at which the expected utility of treatment and no treatment is the same. In this framework, a readily interpretable evaluation of the net benefit of an additional marker is the test tradeoff corresponding to the risk threshold. The test tradeoff is the minimum number of tests for a new marker that need to be traded for a true positive to yield an increase in the net benefit of risk prediction with the additional marker. For a sensitivity analysis the test tradeoff is computed over multiple risk thresholds. This article updates the theory and estimation of the test tradeoff. An example is provided.

Keywords: decision curves; relative utility curves; receiver-operating characteristic curve; risk threshold; test tradeoff

About the article

Published Online: 2012-03-22

Citation Information: The International Journal of Biostatistics, ISSN (Online) 1557-4679, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/1557-4679.1395. Export Citation

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Davood Khalili, Samaneh Asgari, Farzad Hadaegh, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Kazem Rahimi, Noushin Fahimfar, and Fereidoun Azizi
International Journal of Cardiology, 2015, Volume 184, Page 587
John K. Field, Ying Chen, Michael W. Marcus, Fiona E. Mcronald, Olaide Y. Raji, and Stephen W. Duffy
Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2013, Volume 108, Number 5, Page 304
Stuart G. Baker, Ewoud Schuit, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Michael J. Pencina, Andew Vickers, Karel G.M. Moons, Ben W.J. Mol, and Karen S. Lindeman
Statistics in Medicine, 2014, Volume 33, Number 22, Page 3946
Margaret S. Pepe, Jing Fan, Ziding Feng, Thomas Gerds, and Jorgen Hilden
Statistics in Biosciences, 2014
Ewout W. Steyerberg, Moniek M. Vedder, Maarten J. G. Leening, Douwe Postmus, Ralph B. D'Agostino, Ben Van Calster, and Michael J. Pencina
Biometrical Journal, 2014, Page n/a

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in