Table 4.
Discrimination, MAPE and calibration slopes of included models in patients with complete follow-up data (all models and risk scores) and in the full validation cohort (Cox proportional hazards regression models only)
| Study | Patients with complete follow-up (n = 162,653) | Full validation cohort (n = 178,399) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUC (95 % CI) | MAPE (SD)a | Calibration slope (CI) | c-index (95 % CI) | MAPE (SD)a | ||
| Models | Bang et al. [54] | 0.899 (0.895–0.903) | 0.063 (0.162) | 0.97 (0.96–0.98) | NA | NA |
| Chien et al. [51]b | 0.898 (0.895–0.901) | 0.081 (0.162) | 0.65 (0.64–0.65) | 0.888 (0.885–0.892) | 0.085 (0.166) | |
| QKidney® [36]b | 0.910 (0.907–0.913) | 0.05 (0.166) | 1.02 (1.01–1.04) | 0.900 (0.897–0.903) | 0.052 (0.165) | |
| Kshirsagar et al. [53] | 0.896 (0.892–0.900) | 0.068 (0.164) | 1.74 (1.72–1.76) | NA | NA | |
| Kwon et al. [55] | 0.899 (0.895–0.902) | 0.086 (0.158) | 0.68 (0.67–0.69) | NA | NA | |
| O’Seaghdha et al. [52] | 0.907 (0.904–0.911) | 0.089 (0.169) | 0.53 (0.52–0.53) | NA | NA | |
| Thakkinstian et al. [56] | 0.892 (0.888–0.985) | 0.179 (0.161) | 0.44 (0.43–0.45) | NA | NA | |
| Simplified Scores | Bang et al. [54] | 0.895 (0.891–0.899) | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Chien et al. [51] | 0.880 (0.876–0.883) | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| Kshirsagar et al. [53] | 0.891 (0.887–0.895) | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| Kwon et al. [55] | 0.895 (0.891–0.898) | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| Thakkinstian et al. [56] | 0.869 (0.864–0.873) | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
AUC, area under receiver operating characteristic curve; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; NA, not applicable; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval.
aCalculated as mean difference between observed and predicted CKD cases
bCox proportional hazard regression model