Affiliation:
1. Department of Biostatistics University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI USA
2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Asan Medical Center Seoul Republic of Korea
Abstract
Prognostic models are useful tools for assessing a patient's risk of experiencing adverse health events. In practice, these models must be validated before implementation to ensure that they are clinically useful. The concordance index (C‐Index) is a popular statistic that is used for model validation, and it is often applied to models with binary or survival outcome variables. In this paper, we summarize existing criticism of the C‐Index and show that many limitations are accentuated when applied to survival outcomes, and to continuous outcomes more generally. We present several examples that show the challenges in achieving high concordance with survival outcomes, and we argue that the C‐Index is often not clinically meaningful in this setting. We derive a relationship between the concordance probability and the coefficient of determination under an ordinary least squares model with normally distributed predictors, which highlights the limitations of the C‐Index for continuous outcomes. Finally, we recommend existing alternatives that more closely align with common uses of survival models.
Funder
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Subject
Statistics and Probability,Epidemiology
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献