Skip to main content
. 2019 Oct 28;161(12):2467–2478. doi: 10.1007/s00701-019-04074-1

Table 3.

Univariate performance of CT models

Model Complete cohort Active treatment cohort
R2 AUC (95% CI) p value R2 AUC (95% CI) p value
6-month mortality
  Marshall 0.402 0.815 (0.715–0.914) 0.046 0.247 0.750 (0.612–0.888) 0.362
  Rotterdam 0.348 0.774 (0.669–0.879) 0.003 0.119 0.654 (0.509–0.799) 0.037
  Stockholm 0.459 0.850 (0.827–0.973) 0.089 0.287 0.783 (0.653–0.912) 0.390
  Helsinki 0.601 0.900 (0.762–0.938) Ref 0.368 0.816 (0.694–0.939) Ref
6-month unfavorable outcome*
  Marshall 0.574 0.887 (0.802–0.971) Ref 0.498 0.849 (0.742–0.957) Ref
  Rotterdam 0.519 0.846 (0.744–0.947) 0.116 0.443 0.825 (0.710–0.941) 0.366
  Stockholm 0.507 0.871 (0.776–0.967) 0.769 0.407 0.833 (0.718–0.949) 0.802
  Helsinki 0.502 0.868 (0.787–0.949) 0.653 0.363 0.800 (0.685–0.915) 0.391

Differences in AUC were compared using the DeLong test. AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale

*Defined as GOS 1–3; missing for 4 patients