The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Robustness of the "Binormal" Assumptions Used in Fitting ROC Curves
Abstract
The binormal form is the most common model used to formally fit ROC curves to the data from signal detection studies that employ the "rating" method. The author lists a number of justifications that have been offered for this choice, ranging from theoretical considerations of probability laws and signal detection theory, to mathematical tractability and convenience, to empirical results showing that "it fits!" To these justifications is added another, namely that even if an alternative formulation based on another underlying form (e.g., power law) or model (e.g., binomial, Poisson, or gamma type distributions) were in fact correct, the binormal fit differs so little from the true form as to be of no practical consequence. Moreover, the small lack of fit is unlikely to be demonstrated in practice: it is obscured by the much larger variation that can be attributed to sampling of cases. In addition, even if a very large sample of cases could be studied, the small number of rating categories used does not permit seemingly very different models to be distinguished from one another. Key words: binormal assumptions; ROC curves; signal detection theory; rating method. (Med Decis Making 8:197-203, 1988)
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.
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
A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation
Efron, B., & Gong, G. (1983) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1983.10483087 · Cited by 3,229
Cited by
pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves
Robin, X., Turck, N., Hainard, A., Tiberti, N., Lisacek, F., Sanchez, J.-C., & Müller, M. (2011) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 · Cited by 13,697
The American Urological Association Symptom Index for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
Barry, M. J., Fowler, F. J., O’Leary, M. P., Bruskewitz, R. C., Holtgrewe, H. L., Mebust, W. K., Cockett, A. T. K., & The Measurement Committee of the American Urological Association (1992) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36966-5 · Cited by 3,436
(2013) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 2,089
Greiner, M., Pfeiffer, D., & Smith, R. D. (2000) · Preventive Veterinary Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0167-5877(00)00115-x · Cited by 1,923
Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for evaluating diagnostic tests and predictive models
Zou, K. H., O’Malley, A. J., & Mauri, L. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.105.594929 · Cited by 1,473
Metadata
- Authors
- Hanley, J. A.
- Venue
- Medical Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1988-08
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 197-203
- ISSN
- 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-681X
- OpenAlex
- W1994656057
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: The Robustness of the "Binormal" Assumptions Used in Fitting ROC Curves. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0272989x8800800308
- The paper
- Hanley, J. A. (1988). The Robustness of the "Binormal" Assumptions Used in Fitting ROC Curves. Medical Decision Making. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x8800800308
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.