Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jan 25:352:i6.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.i6.

Net benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests

Affiliations

Net benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests

Andrew J Vickers et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Many decisions in medicine involve trade-offs, such as between diagnosing patients with disease versus unnecessary additional testing for those who are healthy. Net benefit is an increasingly reported decision analytic measure that puts benefits and harms on the same scale. This is achieved by specifying an exchange rate, a clinical judgment of the relative value of benefits (such as detecting a cancer) and harms (such as unnecessary biopsy) associated with models, markers, and tests. The exchange rate can be derived by asking simple questions, such as the maximum number of patients a doctor would recommend for biopsy to find one cancer. As the answers to these sorts of questions are subjective, it is possible to plot net benefit for a range of reasonable exchange rates in a “decision curve.” For clinical prediction models, the exchange rate is related to the probability threshold to determine whether a patient is classified as being positive or negative for a disease. Net benefit is useful for determining whether basing clinical decisions on a model, marker, or test would do more good than harm. This is in contrast to traditional measures such as sensitivity, specificity, or area under the curve, which are statistical abstractions not directly informative about clinical value. Recent years have seen an increase in practical applications of net benefit analysis to research data. This is a welcome development, since decision analytic techniques are of particular value when the purpose of a model, marker, or test is to help doctors make better clinical decisions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

None
Details of equation
None
Fig 1 Decision curve showing net benefit for carrying out biopsy in men at risk for aggressive prostate cancer
None
Fig 2 Decision curve as in figure 1 shown for illustrative purposes across all threshold probabilities

Comment in

References

    1. Steyerberg EW. A practical approach to development, validation, and updating. Clinical prediction models.Springer, 2009.
    1. Ankerst DP, Hoefler J, Bock S, et al. Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator 2.0 for the prediction of low- vs high-grade prostate cancer. Urology 2014;83:1362-7. 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.035. .24862395. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liang Y, Ankerst DP, Ketchum NS, et al. Prospective evaluation of operating characteristics of prostate cancer detection biomarkers. J Urol 2011;185:104-10. 10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.088. .21074193. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vickers A, Cronin A, Roobol M, et al. Reducing unnecessary biopsy during prostate cancer screening using a four-kallikrein panel: an independent replication. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2493-8. 10.1200/JCO.2009.24.1968. .20421547. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006;26:565-74. 10.1177/0272989X06295361. .17099194. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources