Recurrent events counted in evaluations of predictive accuracy

Haines, Terry, Hill, Keith, Bennell, Kim and Osborne, Richard 2006, Recurrent events counted in evaluations of predictive accuracy, Journal of clinical epidemiology, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 1155-1161.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Recurrent events counted in evaluations of predictive accuracy
Author(s) Haines, Terry
Hill, Keith
Bennell, Kim
Osborne, Richard
Journal name Journal of clinical epidemiology
Volume number 59
Issue number 11
Start page 1155
End page 1161
Publisher Elsevier Inc.
Place of publication New York, N.Y.
Publication date 2006-11
ISSN 0895-4356
1878-5921
Keyword(s) sensitivity and specificity
epidemiologic methods
diagnostic accuracy
accidental falls
hospitals
Summary Objectives: To describe an alternate approach for the calculation of sensitivity and specificity when analyzing the accuracy of screening tools, which can be used when standard calculations may be inappropriate. SensitivityER (ER denoting event rate) is the number of events correctly predicted, divided by the total number of events. SpecificityER is the amount of time that study participants are predicted to be event negative, divided by the total amount of participant observed time. Variance estimates for these statistics are constructed by bootstrap resampling, taking into account event dependence.

Methods: Standard and alternate approaches for calculating sensitivity and specificity were applied to hospital falls risk screening tool data. In this application, the outcome of interest was a recurrent event, there were multiple applications of the screening tool, delays in screening tool  completion, and patients' follow-up durations were unequal.

Results:
Application of sensitivityER and specificityER to this data not only provided a clearer description of the screening tool's overall accuracy, but also allowed examination of accuracy over time, accuracy in predicting specific event numbers, and evaluation of the added value that screening tool reapplications may have.

Conclusion: SensitivityER and specificityER provide a valuable approach to screening tool evaluation in the clinical setting.
Language eng
Field of Research 110399 Clinical Sciences not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 970111 Expanding Knowledge in the Medical and Health Sciences
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©2006, Elsevier Inc.
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30018644

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Health and Social Development
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 9 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 9 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 332 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 10 Sep 2009, 14:34:59 EST by Lorraine Driscoll

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.