ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2012
Further insight into the incremental value of new markers: the interpretation of performance measures and the importance of clinical context.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complex signals bioinformatics: evaluation of heart rate characteristics monitoring as a novel risk marker for neonatal sepsis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2014Trial
- Multiparametric Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers for Phenotype Classification: A Framework for Development and Validation.Academic radiology · 2023Review
- Developing Biomarker Panels to Predict Progression of Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Surgery.Kidney international reports · 2019Article
- A newly noninvasive model for prediction of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: utility of serum prolactin levels.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Observational
- Development and validation of a cardiovascular disease risk-prediction model using population health surveys: the Cardiovascular Disease Population Risk Tool (CVDPoRT).CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2018Article
- Using ordinal outcomes to construct and select biomarker combinations for single-level prediction.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2018Article
- First things first: risk model performance metrics should reflect the clinical application.Statistics in medicine · 2017Article
- Breast MRI contrast enhancement kinetics of normal parenchyma correlate with presence of breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2016Article
- Reclassification of genetic-based risk predictions as GWAS data accumulate.Genome medicine · 2016Article
- Interpretable Deep Models for ICU Outcome Prediction.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2016Article
- Quantifying the value of biomarkers for predicting mortality.Annals of epidemiology · 2015Article
- Prognostic and Predictive Values and Statistical Interactions in the Era of Targeted Treatment.Genetic epidemiology · 2015Article
- Recent BRCAPRO upgrades significantly improve calibration.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2014Article
- Key concepts and limitations of statistical methods for evaluating biomarkers of kidney disease.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2014Review
- Net reclassification indices for evaluating risk prediction instruments: a critical review.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2014Review
- Clinical utility in evaluation of risk models.American journal of epidemiology · 2012Article
- Pencina et al. respond to "The incremental value of new markers" and "Clinically relevant measures? A note of caution".American journal of epidemiology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this issue of the Journal, Pencina and et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2012;176(6):492-494) examine the operating characteristics of measures of incremental value. Their goal is to provide benchmarks for the measures that can help identify the most promising markers among multiple candidates. They consider a setting in which new predictors are conditionally independent of established predictors. In the present article, the authors consider more general settings. Their results indicate that some of the conclusions made by Pencina et al. are limited to the specific scenarios the authors considered. For example, Pencina et al. observed that continuous net reclassification improvement was invariant to the strength of the baseline model, but the authors of the present study show this invariance does not hold generally. Further, they disagree with the suggestion that such invariance would be desirable for a measure of incremental value. They also do not see evidence to support the claim that the measures provide complementary information. In addition, they show that correlation with baseline predictors can lead to much bigger gains in performance than the conditional independence scenario studied by Pencina et al. Finally, the authors note that the motivation of providing benchmarks actually reinforces previous observations that the problem with these measures is they do not have useful clinical interpretations. If they did, researchers could use the measures directly and benchmarks would not be needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.