IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v39y2019i2p86-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Clinical Impact of Risk Models for Opting Out of Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Kathleen F. Kerr

    (Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA)

  • Marshall D. Brown

    (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle, WA)

  • Tracey L. Marsh

    (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle, WA)

  • Holly Janes

    (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle, WA)

Abstract

Decision curves are a tool for evaluating the population impact of using a risk model for deciding whether to undergo some intervention, which might be a treatment to help prevent an unwanted clinical event or invasive diagnostic testing such as biopsy. The common formulation of decision curves is based on an opt-in framework. That is, a risk model is evaluated based on the population impact of using the model to opt high-risk patients into treatment in a setting where the standard of care is not to treat. Opt-in decision curves display the population net benefit of the risk model in comparison to the reference policy of treating no patients. In some contexts, however, the standard of care in the absence of a risk model is to treat everyone, and the potential use of the risk model would be to opt low-risk patients out of treatment. Although opt-out settings were discussed in the original decision curve paper, opt-out decision curves are underused. We review the formulation of opt-out decision curves and discuss their advantages for interpretation and inference when treat-all is the standard.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathleen F. Kerr & Marshall D. Brown & Tracey L. Marsh & Holly Janes, 2019. "Assessing the Clinical Impact of Risk Models for Opting Out of Treatment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(2), pages 86-90, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:2:p:86-90
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18819479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X18819479
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X18819479?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:2:p:86-90. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.