Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 1;33(2):153–165. doi: 10.3344/kjp.2020.33.2.153

Table 4.

Discrimination and Calibration of Models in Derivation and Validation Cohorts (Primary Outcome)

Model and risk score performance metrics Derivation cohort Validation cohort
Model based performance
Brier scorea 0.293 0.294
Nam–D’Agostino testb χ2 = 7.5930, P = 0.3031 χ2 = 7.6178, P = 0.3407
Harrell’s C statistic (95% CI)c 0.810 (0.805-0.816) 0.812 (0.804-0.820)
Sensitivity (95% CI) 0.442 (0.439-0.446) 0.443 (0.438-0.447)
Specificity (95% CI) 0.954 (0.953-0.955) 0.954 (0.953-0.956)
Positive predictive value (95% CI) 0.825 (0.822-0.828) 0.825 (0.821-0.830)
Negative predictive value (95% CI) 0.777 (0.776-0.778) 0.777 (0.776-0.779)
Accuracy (95% CI) 0.786 (0.784-0.787) 0.786 (0.784-0.788)
Risk score performance
Sensitivity (95% CI) 0.209 (0.207-0.212) 0.211 (0.207-0.215)
Specificity (95% CI) 0.928 (0.927-0.929) 0.929 (0.928-0.931)
Positive predictive value (95% CI) 0.590 (0.585-0.595) 0.597 (0.590-0.604)
Negative predictive value (95% CI) 0.705 (0.704-0.705) 0.705 (0.704-0.706)
Accuracy (95% CI) 0.692 (0.690-0.693) 0.693 (0.690-0.695)

CI: confidence interval.

a

Measures both discrimination and calibration; lower values indicate higher accuracy. bA modification of Hosmer–Lemeshow test suited for survival data; measure of calibration that is specific to censored survival data (lower χ2 and higher P values) indicate better calibration. cA measure of discrimination for which higher values indicate better discrimination.