Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29955849›Full record

ReviewEuropean heart journal2019

Application of net reclassification index to non-nested and point-based risk prediction models: a review.

Laine E Thomas, Emily C O'Brien, Jonathan P Piccini, Ralph B D'Agostino, Michael J Pencina

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European heart journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Laine E ThomasDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 1102, Durham, NC, USA.
Emily C O'BrienDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, 2400 Pratt St, 7021 North Pavilion, Durham, NC, USA.
Jonathan P PicciniDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, 2400 Pratt St, 7021 North Pavilion, Durham, NC, USA.
Ralph B D'AgostinoDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Boston University, 111 Cummington Street, Boston, MA, USA.
Michael J PencinaDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 1102, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Statistical Methods for Complex Data in Cardiovascular DiseaseR01HL118336 · NHLBI · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI O'BRIEN, SEAN M, TSIATIS, ANASTASIOS A · 2013 to 2016
$1.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL118336
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Much of medical risk prediction involves externally derived prediction equations, nomograms, and point-based risk scores. These settings are vulnerable to misleading findings of incremental value based on versions of the net reclassification index (NRI) in common use. By applying non-nested models and point-based risk scores in the setting of stroke risk prediction in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), we demonstrate current recommendations for presentation and interpretation of the NRI. We emphasize pitfalls that are likely to occur with point-based risk scores that are easy to neglect when statistical methodology is focused on continuous models. In order to make appropriate decisions about risk prediction and personalized medicine, physicians, researchers, and policy makers need to understand the strengths and limitations of the NRI.

Indexed as

Decision Making, Computer-AssistedModels, StatisticalAtrial FibrillationCalibrationHumansRisk AssessmentNet reclassification indexRisk predictionRisk scores

Identifiers

PMID29955849
PMCPMC6568208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.