Skip to main content
. 2015 Mar 11;10(3):e0118644. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118644

Table 6. Comparison of AUROCs between different risk models used to predict one- year mortality.

AUROC (95% CI)
DC IVC TVC NTTD
n = 40,117 n = 8,244 n = 4,248 n = 1,194
IHTSA 0.65 (0.64–0.66) 0.62 (0.61–0.64) 0.64 (0.62–0.67) 0.59 (0.47–0.72)
DRI 0.56 (0.56–0.57) 0.56 (0.54–0.57) 0.59 (0.57–0.61) 0.55 (0.43–0.68)
IMPACT 0.61 (0.60–0.61) 0.59 (0.58–0.61) 0.65 (0.63–0.67) 0.52 (0.38–0.66)
RSS 0.61 (0.61–0.62) 0.60 (0.59–0.62)* 0.66 (0.64–0.68) 0.58 (0.45–0.71)

*p < 0.05

p < 0.001 compared with ITHSA. AUROC, area under the receiver operating curve; CI, confidence interval; DC, derivation cohort; DRI, donor risk index for transplantation (reported in the paper by Weiss et al. [6]); IMPACT, index for mortality prediction after cardiac transplantation (reported in the paper by Weiss et al. [7]); ITHSA, international heart transplantation survival algorithm; IVC, internal validation cohort; NTTD, Nordic thoracic transplantation database; RSS, risk stratification score (reported in the paper by Hong et al. [9]); TVC, temporal validation cohort.