Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Clin Densitom. 2013 Nov 27;17(4):449–457. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2013.09.020

Table 3.

Comparisons of Model Discrimination of Those With from Those Without Prevalent Radiographic Vertebral Fracture

Comparison
Measure
Model 2 vs. 1 Model 3 vs. 2 Model 4 vs. 2
&Range of C-stat chi2 (Range of p-values) 8.55 – 16.5 (<0.001 to 0.003) 0.00 – 1.02 (0.28 to 0.96) 0.01 – 2.13 (0.14 to 0.92)
NRI – 5%^ (p-value) 0.059 (0.01) 0.026 (0.22) 0.038 (0.13)
NRI – 10%** (p-value) 0.049 (0.09) 0.003 (0.90) 0.037 (0.26)
NRI – 15%^^ (p-value) 0.024 (0.22) 0.006 (0.78) 0.012 (0.64)
&

Comparisons across five pairs of bootstrapped models

^

Net Reclassification Index Score (Pepe Method), with a pre-test probability cutpoint of 5%

**

Net Reclassification Index Score (Pepe Method), with a pre-test probability cut point of 10%

^^

Net Reclassification Index Score (Pepe Method), with a pre-test probability cut point of 15%