TABLE 4.
Performance of the Quantitative GLM Model vs the CHIIDA Model in Testing Data set
| Testing data set (n = 374) | GLM | RP | KIIDS-TBI | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <1 | <3 | <5 | <1 | <3 | <5 | <1 | <3 | <5 | |
| High acuity disposition (%) | |||||||||
| Composite outcome | 26 | 25 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 27 | 26 | 25 |
| No composite outcome | 85 | 43 | 36 | 73 | 73 | 46 | 255 | 114 | 62 |
| Low acuity disposition | |||||||||
| Composite outcome | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| No composite outcome | 262 | 304 | 311 | 274 | 274 | 301 | 92 | 233 | 285 |
| Sensitivity (95% CI) | 0.96 (0.81-1.0) | 0.93 (0.76-0.99) | 0.89 (0.71-0.98) | 0.89 (0.71-0.98) | 0.89 (0.71-0.98) | 0.89 (0.71-0.98) | 1.0 (0.87-1.0) | 0.96 (0.81-1.0) | 0.93 (0.76-0.99) |
| Specificity (95% CI) | 0.76 (0.71-0.80) | 0.88 (0.84-0.91) | 0.90 (0.86-0.93) | 0.79 (0.74-0.83) | 0.79 (0.74-0.83) | 0.87 (0.83-0.90) | 0.27 (0.22-0.31) | 0.67 (0.62-0.72) | 0.82 (0.78-0.86) |
| PPV (95% CI) | 0.23 (0.16-0.32) | 0.37 (0.25-0.49) | 0.40 (0.28-0.53) | 0.25 (0.17-0.35) | 0.25 (0.17-0.35) | 0.34 (0.23-0.47) | 0.10 (0.06-0.14) | 0.19 (0.13-0.26) | 0.29 (0.20-0.39) |
| NPV (95% CI) | 0.996 (0.98-1.0) | 0.99 (0.98-1.0) | 0.99 (0.97-1.0) | 0.99 (0.97-1.0) | 0.99 (0.97-1.0) | 0.99 (0.97-1.0) | 1.0 (0.96-1.0) | 0.996 (0.98-1.0) | 0.99 (0.98-1.0) |
CHIIDA, Children's Intracranial Injury Decision Aid; GLM, generalized linear modeling; KIIDS-TBI, kids intracranial injury decision support tool for traumatic brain injury; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; RP, recursive partitioning.