» Articles » PMID: 22716998

Interpreting the Concordance Statistic of a Logistic Regression Model: Relation to the Variance and Odds Ratio of a Continuous Explanatory Variable

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2012 Jun 22
PMID 22716998
Citations 111
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: When outcomes are binary, the c-statistic (equivalent to the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve) is a standard measure of the predictive accuracy of a logistic regression model.

Methods: An analytical expression was derived under the assumption that a continuous explanatory variable follows a normal distribution in those with and without the condition. We then conducted an extensive set of Monte Carlo simulations to examine whether the expressions derived under the assumption of binormality allowed for accurate prediction of the empirical c-statistic when the explanatory variable followed a normal distribution in the combined sample of those with and without the condition. We also examine the accuracy of the predicted c-statistic when the explanatory variable followed a gamma, log-normal or uniform distribution in combined sample of those with and without the condition.

Results: Under the assumption of binormality with equality of variances, the c-statistic follows a standard normal cumulative distribution function with dependence on the product of the standard deviation of the normal components (reflecting more heterogeneity) and the log-odds ratio (reflecting larger effects). Under the assumption of binormality with unequal variances, the c-statistic follows a standard normal cumulative distribution function with dependence on the standardized difference of the explanatory variable in those with and without the condition. In our Monte Carlo simulations, we found that these expressions allowed for reasonably accurate prediction of the empirical c-statistic when the distribution of the explanatory variable was normal, gamma, log-normal, and uniform in the entire sample of those with and without the condition.

Conclusions: The discriminative ability of a continuous explanatory variable cannot be judged by its odds ratio alone, but always needs to be considered in relation to the heterogeneity of the population.

Citing Articles

Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores (PRSs) in Predicting Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Common-Variant and Mixed Scores with Insights into Rare Variant Analysis.

Verras G, Hamady Z, Collins A, Tapper W Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(2).

PMID: 39858023 PMC: 11764467. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17020241.


Detecting respiratory impairment in newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis by MRC dyspnoea scale and microfibrillar-associated protein 4.

Sofiudottir B, Moller S, Christensen R, Harders S, Sorensen G, Blegvad J Eur Clin Respir J. 2025; 12(1):2449270.

PMID: 39839254 PMC: 11749244. DOI: 10.1080/20018525.2024.2449270.


Validity of the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups system on the utilisation of healthcare services in Norway: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Hosar R, Berntsen G, Steinsbekk A BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24(1):1279.

PMID: 39448990 PMC: 11515438. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-11715-4.


Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Hemosiderin Deposits in Recent Small Subcortical Infarcts.

Xu Y, Chappell F, Valdes Hernandez M, Arteaga-Reyes C, Clancy U, Garcia D Neurology. 2024; 103(10):e209973.

PMID: 39447100 PMC: 11510007. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000209973.


Factors associated with COVID-19 infection in pregnant women: Focusing on maternal anxiety.

Jeong W, Kim B, Hong S, Cho E, Kim S, Moon J PLoS One. 2024; 19(10):e0312300.

PMID: 39446762 PMC: 11500910. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312300.


References
1.
Deeks J, Macaskill P, Irwig L . The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58(9):882-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.016. View

2.
Austin P . Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009; 28(25):3083-107. PMC: 3472075. DOI: 10.1002/sim.3697. View

3.
Normand S, Landrum M, Guadagnoli E, Ayanian J, Ryan T, Cleary P . Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 54(4):387-98. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00321-8. View

4.
Pepe M, Janes H, Longton G, Leisenring W, Newcomb P . Limitations of the odds ratio in gauging the performance of a diagnostic, prognostic, or screening marker. Am J Epidemiol. 2004; 159(9):882-90. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwh101. View

5.
Janssens A, Moonesinghe R, Yang Q, Steyerberg E, Van Duijn C, Khoury M . The impact of genotype frequencies on the clinical validity of genomic profiling for predicting common chronic diseases. Genet Med. 2007; 9(8):528-35. DOI: 10.1097/gim.0b013e31812eece0. View