Calibration: the Achilles heel of predictive analytics
Background The assessment of calibration performance of risk prediction models based on regression or more flexible machine learning algorithms receives little attention. Main text Herein, we argue that this needs to change immediately because poorly calibrated algorithms can be misleading and poten...
Saved in:
| Published in: | BMC medicine Vol. 17; no. 1; pp. 230 - 7 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
London
BioMed Central
16.12.2019
BioMed Central Ltd Springer Nature B.V BMC |
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 1741-7015, 1741-7015 |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background
The assessment of calibration performance of risk prediction models based on regression or more flexible machine learning algorithms receives little attention.
Main text
Herein, we argue that this needs to change immediately because poorly calibrated algorithms can be misleading and potentially harmful for clinical decision-making. We summarize how to avoid poor calibration at algorithm development and how to assess calibration at algorithm validation, emphasizing balance between model complexity and the available sample size. At external validation, calibration curves require sufficiently large samples. Algorithm updating should be considered for appropriate support of clinical practice.
Conclusion
Efforts are required to avoid poor calibration when developing prediction models, to evaluate calibration when validating models, and to update models when indicated. The ultimate aim is to optimize the utility of predictive analytics for shared decision-making and patient counseling. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| ISSN: | 1741-7015 1741-7015 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12916-019-1466-7 |