Skip to main content

Table 4 Discrimination, MAPE and calibration slopes of included models in patients with complete follow-up data (all models and risk scores) and in the full validation cohort (Cox proportional hazards regression models only)

From: An external validation of models to predict the onset of chronic kidney disease using population-based electronic health records from Salford, UK

 

Study

Patients with complete follow-up (n = 162,653)

Full validation cohort (n = 178,399)

AUC (95 % CI)

MAPE (SD)a

Calibration slope (CI)

c-index (95 % CI)

MAPE (SD)a

Models

Bang et al. [54]

0.899 (0.895–0.903)

0.063 (0.162)

0.97 (0.96–0.98)

NA

NA

Chien et al. [51]b

0.898 (0.895–0.901)

0.081 (0.162)

0.65 (0.64–0.65)

0.888 (0.885–0.892)

0.085 (0.166)

QKidney® [36]b

0.910 (0.907–0.913)

0.05 (0.166)

1.02 (1.01–1.04)

0.900 (0.897–0.903)

0.052 (0.165)

Kshirsagar et al. [53]

0.896 (0.892–0.900)

0.068 (0.164)

1.74 (1.72–1.76)

NA

NA

Kwon et al. [55]

0.899 (0.895–0.902)

0.086 (0.158)

0.68 (0.67–0.69)

NA

NA

O’Seaghdha et al. [52]

0.907 (0.904–0.911)

0.089 (0.169)

0.53 (0.52–0.53)

NA

NA

Thakkinstian et al. [56]

0.892 (0.888–0.985)

0.179 (0.161)

0.44 (0.43–0.45)

NA

NA

Simplified Scores

Bang et al. [54]

0.895 (0.891–0.899)

NA

NA

NA

NA

Chien et al. [51]

0.880 (0.876–0.883)

NA

NA

NA

NA

Kshirsagar et al. [53]

0.891 (0.887–0.895)

NA

NA

NA

NA

Kwon et al. [55]

0.895 (0.891–0.898)

NA

NA

NA

NA

Thakkinstian et al. [56]

0.869 (0.864–0.873)

NA

NA

NA

NA

  1. AUC, area under receiver operating characteristic curve; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; NA, not applicable; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval.
  2. aCalculated as mean difference between observed and predicted CKD cases
  3. bCox proportional hazard regression model