Abstract
Translating prediction models into practice and supporting clinicians’ decision-making demand demonstration of clinical value. Existing approaches to evaluating machine learning models emphasize discriminatory power, which is only a part of the medical decision problem. We propose the Applicability Area (ApAr), a decision-analytic utility-based approach to evaluating predictive models that communicate the range of prior probability and test cutoffs for which the model has positive utility; larger ApArs suggest a broader potential use of the model. We assess ApAr with simulated datasets and with three published medical datasets. ApAr adds value beyond the typical area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) metric analysis. As an example, in the diabetes dataset, the top model by ApAr was ranked as the 23rd best model by AUROC. Decision makers looking to adopt and implement models can leverage ApArs to assess if the local range of priors and utilities is within the respective ApArs.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Figures 1a and 1b have been updated to use consistent language throughout the manuscript. Fixed typos.
Data Availability
All data produced are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
