 |
|
Evaluation of the Framingham Risk Score in the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer–Norfolk Cohort—Invited Commentary
Michael J. Pencina, PhD;
Ralph B. D’Agostino, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(11):1216-1218.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Despite notable improvements in risk quantification and management, cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity. A substantial proportion of CVD events is experienced by individuals below treatment thresholds established based on standard risk factors. This motivates researchers to look for new risk factors or markers that could further improve risk prediction.
The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) has been the most commonly used measure of performance for predictive models. It quantifies discrimination, defined as the ability of the model to separate subjects who will experience the event ("events") from those who will not ("nonevents"), or in the time-to-event context, to rank them according to their event times based on the predicted probabilities of event calculated at baseline. Notwithstanding the fact that the AUC remains a key measure of model performance, it is becoming . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Evaluation of the Framingham Risk Score in the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer–Norfolk Cohort: Does Adding Glycated Hemoglobin Improve the Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease Events?
Rebecca K. Simmons, Stephen Sharp, S. Matthijs Boekholdt, Lincoln A. Sargeant, Kay-Tee Khaw, Nicholas J. Wareham, and Simon J. Griffin
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(11):1209-1216.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
