Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34446286›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2023

Limitations of receiver operating characteristic curve on imbalanced data: Assist device mortality risk scores.

Faezeh Movahedi, Rema Padman, James F Antaki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Age predicts Alzheimer's in Down syndrome better than MRI, plasma, or cognition.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Innovations in biomarker stratification for precision oncology.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026
    Review
  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. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Faezeh MovahediSwanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa.
Rema PadmanHeinz College, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pa.
James F AntakiMeinig School of Biomedical Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Electronic address: antaki@cornell.edu.

Funding

CORA_TM_A Personalized Cardiac Counselor for Optimal TherapyR01HL122639 · NHLBI · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI ANTAKI, JAMES F., MURALI, SRINIVAS · 2015 to 2018
$3.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL122639
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn the left ventricular assist device domain, the receiver operating characteristic is a commonly applied metric of performance of classifiers. However, the receiver operating characteristic can provide a distorted view of classifiers' ability to predict short-term mortality due to the overwhelmingly greater proportion of patients who survive, that is, imbalanced data. This study illustrates the ambiguity of the receiver operating characteristic in evaluating 2 classifiers of 90-day left ventricular assist device mortality and introduces the precision recall curve as a supplemental metric that is more representative of left ventricular assist device classifiers in predicting the minority class.

methodsThis study compared the receiver operating characteristic and precision recall curve for 2 classifiers for 90-day left ventricular assist device mortality, HeartMate Risk Score and Random Forest for 800 patients (test group) recorded in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support who received a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device between 2006 and 2016 (mean age, 59 years; 146 female vs 654 male patients), in whom 90-day mortality rate is only 8%.

resultsThe receiver operating characteristic indicates similar performance of Random Forest and HeartMate Risk Score classifiers with respect to area under the curve of 0.77 and Random Forest 0.63, respectively. This is in contrast to their precision recall curve with area under the curve of 0.43 versus 0.16 for Random Forest and HeartMate Risk Score, respectively. The precision recall curve for HeartMate Risk Score showed the precision rapidly decreased to only 10% with slightly increasing sensitivity.

conclusionsThe receiver operating characteristic can portray an overly optimistic performance of a classifier or risk score when applied to imbalanced data. The precision recall curve provides better insight about the performance of a classifier by focusing on the minority class.

Indexed as

Heart-Assist DevicesHeart FailureFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsROC Curveimbalanced dataLVADPRCROC

Identifiers

PMID34446286
PMCPMC8800945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.