Cited by 1,535Statistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyProbability and Statistical Research

On the C‐statistics for evaluating overall adequacy of risk prediction procedures with censored survival data

Open access
Uno, Hajime, Cai, Tianxi, Pencina, Michael J., D'Agostino, Ralph B., Wei, L. J.·2011·Statistics in Medicine

Abstract

For modern evidence‐based medicine, a well thought‐out risk scoring system for predicting the occurrence of a clinical event plays an important role in selecting prevention and treatment strategies. Such an index system is often established based on the subject's ‘baseline’ genetic or clinical markers via a working parametric or semi‐parametric model. To evaluate the adequacy of such a system, C‐statistics are routinely used in the medical literature to quantify the capacity of the estimated risk score in discriminating among subjects with different event times. The C‐statistic provides a global assessment of a fitted survival model for the continuous event time rather than focussing on the prediction of bit ‐year survival for a fixed time. When the event time is possibly censored, however, the population parameters corresponding to the commonly used C‐statistics may depend on the study‐specific censoring distribution. In this article, we present a simple C‐statistic without this shortcoming. The new procedure consistently estimates a conventional concordance measure which is free of censoring. We provide a large sample approximation to the distribution of this estimator for making inferences about the concordance measure. Results from numerical studies suggest that the new procedure performs well in finite sample. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sim.4154

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 1,535

Authors
Uno, H., Cai, T., Pencina, M. J., D'Agostino, R. B., & Wei, L. J.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Uno, Hajime
Venue
Statistics in Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-01-13
Volume
30
Issue
10
Pages
1105-1117
ISSN
  • 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0258
OpenAlex
W2120579447
Cited by
1,535
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 185 · 2025: 162 · 2024: 164 · 2023: 151 · 2022: 136 · 2021: 157 · 2020: 126 · 2019: 104 · 2018: 79 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 64 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 21
FWCI
29.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Statistics in Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Collection of Biostatistics Research Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01hc25195-41-0-1, N01-HC 25195)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (N01‐HC25195, N01-HC-025195)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM079330)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI024643, R01AI052817)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
Keywords
concordance index, concordance measures, risk prediction, censored survival data, risk scoring, time-to-event prediction, censoring distribution, large sample approximation, risk discrimination
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Cardiovascular Diseases, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Risk Assessment, Evidence-Based Medicine, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review