Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Misuse of DeLong test to compare AUCs for nested models

Open access
Demler, Olga V., Pencina, Michael J., D'Agostino, Ralph B.·2012·Statistics in Medicine

Abstract

The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC of ROC) is a widely used measure of discrimination in risk prediction models. Routinely, the Mann–Whitney statistics is used as an estimator of AUC, while the change in AUC is tested by the DeLong test. However, very often, in settings where the model is developed and tested on the same dataset, the added predictor is statistically significantly associated with the outcome but fails to produce a significant improvement in the AUC. No conclusive resolution exists to explain this finding. In this paper, we will show that the reason lies in the inappropriate application of the DeLong test in the setting of nested models. Using numerical simulations and a theoretical argument based on generalized U‐statistics, we show that if the added predictor is not statistically significantly associated with the outcome, the null distribution is non‐normal, contrary to the assumption of DeLong test. Our simulations of different scenarios show that the loss of power because of such a misuse of the DeLong test leads to a conservative test for small and moderate effect sizes. This problem does not exist in cases of predictors that are associated with the outcome and for non‐nested models. We suggest that for nested models, only the test of association be performed for the new predictors, and if the result is significant, change in AUC be estimated with an appropriate confidence interval, which can be based on the DeLong approach. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

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.5328

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 306

Metadata

Authors
Demler, O. V., Pencina, M. J., & D'Agostino, R. B.
Venue
Statistics in Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-03-13
Volume
31
Issue
23
Pages
2577-2587
ISSN
  • 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0258
OpenAlex
W2065565905
Cited by
306
References
5
FWCI
14.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Misuse of DeLong test to compare AUCs for nested models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/sim.5328
The paper
Demler, O. V., Pencina, M. J., & D'Agostino, R. B. (2012). Misuse of DeLong test to compare AUCs for nested models. Statistics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5328

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.