The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ROC curves for clinical prediction models part 1. ROC plots showed no added value above the AUC when evaluating the performance of clinical prediction models
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves show how well a risk prediction model discriminates between patients with and without a condition. We aim to investigate how ROC curves are presented in the literature and discuss and illustrate their potential limitations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a pragmatic literature review of contemporary publications that externally validated clinical prediction models. We illustrated limitations of ROC curves using a testicular cancer case study and simulated data. RESULTS: Of 86 identified prediction modeling studies, 52 (60%) presented ROC curves without thresholds and one (1%) presented an ROC curve with only a few thresholds. We illustrate that ROC curves in their standard form withhold threshold information have an unstable shape even for the same area under the curve (AUC) and are problematic for comparing model performance conditional on threshold. We compare ROC curves with classification plots, which show sensitivity and specificity conditional on risk thresholds. CONCLUSION: ROC curves do not offer more information than the AUC to indicate discriminative ability. To assess the model's performance for decision-making, results should be provided conditional on risk thresholds. Therefore, if discriminatory ability must be visualized, classification plots are attractive.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“For binary outcomes, the C-statistic is equal to area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). 37,38”
From Evaluation of performance measures in predictive artificial intelligence models to support medical decisions: overview and guidance (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“A limitation of these plots is that the thresholds are not easily visible (figure 1).”
From Evaluation of performance measures in predictive artificial intelligence models to support medical decisions: overview and guidance (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
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
DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M., & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. (1988) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531595 · Cited by 22,649
The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 · Cited by 21,856
Pencina, M. J., D' Agostino, R. B., D' Agostino, R. B., & Vasan, R. S. (2008) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2929 · Cited by 6,493
Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models
Vickers, A. J., & Elkin, E. B. (2006) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x06295361 · Cited by 6,341
Assessing the Performance of Prediction Models: A Framework for Traditional and Novel Measures
Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Cook, N. R., Gerds, T., Gonen, M., Obuchowski, N., Pencina, M. J., & Kattan, M. W. (2010) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181c30fb2 · Cited by 5,170
Self-citationMoons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Reitsma, J. B., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Macaskill, P., Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Ransohoff, D. F., & Collins, G. S. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-0698 · Cited by 5,147
Self-citationEvaluating the Yield of Medical Tests
Harrell, F. E. (1982) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1982.03320430047030 · Cited by 3,490
ROCR: visualizing classifier performance in R
Sing, T., Sander, O., Beerenwinkel, N., & Lengauer, T. (2005) · Computer applications in the biosciences · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bti623 · Cited by 3,172
Time‐Dependent ROC Curves for Censored Survival Data and a Diagnostic Marker
Heagerty, P. J., Lumley, T., & PEPE, M. S. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00337.x · Cited by 2,870
The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction
PEPE, M. S. (2003) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198509844.001.0001 · Cited by 2,206
Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction
Cook, N. R. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.672402 · Cited by 2,167
The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction
PEPE, M. S. (2005) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2005.s278 · Cited by 1,907
Perkins, N. J., & Schisterman, E. F. (2006) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwj063 · Cited by 1,794
Uno, H., Cai, T., Pencina, M. J., D'Agostino, R. B., & Wei, L. J. (2011) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4154 · Cited by 1,535
Self-citationSurvival Model Predictive Accuracy and ROC Curves
Heagerty, P. J., & Zheng, Y. (2005) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2005.030814.x · Cited by 1,471
Bamber, D. (1975) · Journal of Mathematical Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-2496(75)90001-2 · Cited by 1,452
Reporting and Interpreting Decision Curve Analysis: A Guide for Investigators
CALSTER, B. V., Wynants, L., Verbeek, J. F. M., Verbakel, J. Y. J., Christodoulou, E., Vickers, A. J., Roobol, M. J., & Steyerberg, E. W. (2018) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.038 · Cited by 1,306
Self-citationVickers, A. J., Van Calster, B., & Steyerberg, E. W. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i6 · Cited by 1,163
Self-citationCriteria for Evaluation of Novel Markers of Cardiovascular Risk
Hlatky, M. A., Greenland, P., Arnett, D. K., Ballantyne, C. M., Criqui, M. H., Elkind, M. S. V., Go, A. S., Harrell, F. E., Hong, Y., Howard, B. V., et al. (2009) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.109.192278 · Cited by 1,146
A calibration hierarchy for risk models was defined: from utopia to empirical data
Van Calster, B., Nieboer, D., Vergouwe, Y., De Cock, B., Pencina, M. J., & Steyerberg, E. W. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.12.005 · Cited by 910
Self-citationTime-dependent ROC curve analysis in medical research: current methods and applications
Kamarudin, A. N., Cox, T. F., & Kolamunnage‐Dona, R. (2017) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0332-6 · Cited by 839
The use of receiver operating characteristic curves in biomedical informatics
Lasko, T. A., Bhagwat, J. G., Zou, K. H., & Lucila Ohno-machado, A. (2005) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2005.02.008 · Cited by 821
Kerr, K. F., Brown, M. D., Zhu, K., & Janes, H. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.65.5654 · Cited by 697
Therapeutic decision making: a cost-benefit analysis
Pauker, S. G., & Kassirer, J. P. (1975) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197507312930505 · Cited by 507
Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/l15-5093-2 · Cited by 493
External correspondence: Decompositions of the mean probability score
Yates, J. (1982) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(82)90237-9 · Cited by 466
ROC Curves in Clinical Chemistry: Uses, Misuses, and Possible Solutions
Obuchowski, N. A., Lieber, M. L., & Wians, F. H. (2004) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2004.031823 · Cited by 358
Estimation of time‐dependent area under the ROC curve for long‐term risk prediction
Chambless, L. E., & Diao, G. (2005) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2299 · Cited by 320
Misuse of DeLong test to compare AUCs for nested models
Demler, O., Pencina, M. J., & D’Agostino, R. B. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5328 · Cited by 313
The Youden Index and the Optimal Cut‐Point Corrected for Measurement Error
Perkins, N. J., & Schisterman, E. F. (2005) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.200410133 · Cited by 289
Interpreting diagnostic accuracy studies for patient care
Mallett, S., Halligan, S., Thompson, M., Collins, P. G. S., & Altman, D. G. (2012) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e3999 · Cited by 249
Newcombe, R. G. (2005) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2323 · Cited by 159
Using Relative Utility Curves to Evaluate Risk Prediction
Baker, S. G., Cook, N. R., Vickers, A., & Kramer, B. S. (2009) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2009.00592.x · Cited by 142
Qin, G., & Hotilovac, L. (2007) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280207087173 · Cited by 125
Comparing risk prediction models
Collins, G. S., & Moons, K. G. M. (2012) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e3186 · Cited by 110
Steyerberg, E. W., Gerl, A., Fosså, S. D., Sleijfer, D. T., de Wit, R., Kirkels, W. J., Schmeller, N. T., Clemm, C., Habbema, J. D. F., & Keizer, H. J. (1998) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1998.16.1.269 · Cited by 105
Self-citationPEPE, M. S., Janes, H., Li, C. I., Bossuyt, P. M., Feng, Z., & Hilden, J. (2016) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2015.252163 · Cited by 87
Vergouwe, Y., Steyerberg, E. W., Foster, R. S., Sleijfer, D. T., Fosså, S. D., Gerl, A., de Wit, R., Roberts, J. T., & Habbema, J. D. F. (2006) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.06.047 · Cited by 85
Self-citationPeirce, Youden, and Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves
Baker, S. G., & Kramer, B. S. (2007) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/000313007x247643 · Cited by 80
Leening, M. J. G., Steyerberg, E. W., CALSTER, B. V., D’Agostino, R. B., & Pencina, M. J. (2014) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6133 · Cited by 55
Self-citationMethods for Evaluating Prediction Performance of Biomarkers and Tests
PEPE, M. S., & Janes, H. (2013) · Lecture notes in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8981-8_7 · Cited by 44
Risk Assessment and Evaluation of Predictions
Lee, M. T., Gail, M. H., Pfeiffer, R. M., Satten, G. A., Cai, T., & Gandy, A. (2013) · Lecture notes in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8981-8 · Cited by 40
Steyerberg, E. W., Vedder, M. M., Leening, M. J. G., Postmus, D., D’Agostino, R. B., CALSTER, B. V., & Pencina, M. J. (2014) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.201300260 · Cited by 29
Self-citationDetermining Decision Limits for New Biomarkers: Clinical and Statistical Considerations
Morrow, D. A., & Cook, N. R. (2010) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2010.155879 · Cited by 23
Statistical graphics in action: making better sense of the ROC curve
Althouse, A. D. (2016) · International Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.04.026 · Cited by 20
Risk Prediction for Individuals
CALSTER, B. V., Steyerberg, E. W., & Harrell, F. H. (2015) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2015.12215 · Cited by 16
Self-citationCALSTER, B. V., Steyerberg, E. W., D’Agostino, R. B., & Pencina, M. J. (2013) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x13513654 · Cited by 9
Self-citationEfficient nonparametric confidence bands for receiver operating-characteristic curves
Martínez‐Camblor, P., Pérez‐Fernández, S., & Corral, N. (2016) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280216672490 · Cited by 7
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 2): how to undertake an external validation study
Riley, R. D., Archer, L., Snell, K. I. E., Ensor, J., Dhiman, P., Martin, G. P., Bonnett, L. J., & Collins, P. G. S. (2024) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-074820 · Cited by 565
Rosati, D., Palmieri, M., Brunelli, G., Morrione, A., Iannelli, F., Frullanti, E., & Giordano, A. (2024) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2024.02.018 · Cited by 216
Evidence of questionable research practices in clinical prediction models
White, N. M., Parsons, R., Collins, P. G. S., & Barnett, A. G. (2023) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-023-03048-6 · Cited by 149
Van Calster, B., Collins, G. S., Vickers, A. J., Wynants, L., Kerr, K. F., Barreñada, L., Varoquaux, G., Singh, K., Moons, K. G., Hernandez-Boussard, T., et al. (2025) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/j.landig.2025.100916 · Cited by 112
Self-citationBaquero, J. P. H., Chumillas, M. R., Perez, A. G., Escámez, P. S. F., Samper, A. A., Iguaz, A., Esnoz, A., & Gómez, A. P. (2013) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Verbakel, J. Y., Steyerberg, E. W., Uno, H., De Cock, B., Wynants, L., Collins, G. S., & Van Calster, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-10
- Volume
- 126
- Pages
- 207-216
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3045258609
- Cited by
- 138
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 8.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- erratum (2021-02-01)
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Cancer Research UK
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
- Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
- Seventh Framework Programme
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
- Keywords
- ROC curve, area under the curve, clinical prediction model, risk prediction model, sensitivity and specificity, risk thresholds, model discrimination, external validation, testicular cancer
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Decision Rules, Computer Simulation, Decision Making, Humans, Lymph Nodes, Male, Models, Theoretical, Predictive Value of Tests, Retroperitoneal Neoplasms, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity, Testicular Neoplasms, Models, Statistical, Risk Assessment, Area Under Curve
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
