New biomarkers and predictive models that aim to improve the identification of people at risk of cardiovascular disease are constantly proposed. Clinicians need to be aware of the various methods used to assess these biomarkers and models and how these should be interpreted. New biomarkers and models are assessed in terms of their contribution to global fit, discrimination, calibration, and reclassification. These measures, when used in isolation, do not address the clinically important questions of whether the new model predicts risk more accurately than existing models and whether the risks predicted for individuals are sufficiently different to warrant a change in treatment decisions. We recommend that these measures be supplemented with graphical displays such as a calibration plot for the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and a scatterplot of the risks predicted by the models being compared. We encourage researchers to report such analyses from studies on the clinical utility of new biomarkers because this information is pertinent for the clinician who must decide whether to test for a new biomarker in their clinical practice.
Calibration plots for the predictive model containing the Framingham variables and retinal arteriolar caliber. A, Categories based on equal increments of risk (P = .35, Gronnesby-Borgan test). B, Categories based on equal numbers of people in each category (P = .52, Gronnesby-Borgan test).
Ten-year risk of incident coronary heart disease (CHD) predicted by the model containing retinal arteriolar caliber and Framingham variables against risk predicted by model containing only the Framingham variables. Data are given as CHD events/total number of events and censored observations (total = 207/4912).
Thank you for submitting a comment on this article. It will be reviewed by JAMA Internal Medicine editors. You will be notified when your comment has been published. Comments should not exceed 500 words of text and 10 references.
Do not submit personal medical questions or information that could identify a specific patient, questions about a particular case, or general inquiries to an author. Only content that has not been published, posted, or submitted elsewhere should be submitted. By submitting this Comment, you and any coauthors transfer copyright to the journal if your Comment is posted.
* = Required Field
Disclosure of Any Conflicts of Interest*
Indicate all relevant conflicts of interest of each author below, including all relevant financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including, but not limited to, employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speakers’ bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued. If all authors have none, check "No potential conflicts or relevant financial interests" in the box below. Please also indicate any funding received in support of this work. The information will be posted with your response.
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Web of Science® Times Cited: 66
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
More Listings atJAMACareerCenter.com >
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a link to reset your password.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send instructions on how to reset your password to the email address we have on record.
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.