Skip to main content

Table 1 Median chance-corrected concordance (%) for InSilicoVA and Tariff 2.0

From: Performance of InSilicoVA for assigning causes of death to verbal autopsies: multisite validation study using clinical diagnostic gold standards

  

InSilicoVA(default probbase)

InSilicoVA(InterVA training)

InSilicoVA(Tariff 2.0 training)

Tariff 2.0

  

Median

95% UI

Median

95% UI

Median

95% UI

Median

95% UI

Adult

No HCE

16.1

(16.0, 16.2)

28.7

(28.3, 29.2)

28.5

(28.3, 28.7)

37.8

(37.6, 37.9)

 

HCE

21.0

(20.9, 21.1)

33.0

(32.8, 33.3)

34.1

(33.9, 34.5)

50.5

(50.2, 50.7)

Child

No HCE

29.2

(29.0, 29.4)

35.8

(35.5, 36.3)

38.8

(38.4, 39.5)

44.6

(44.2, 45.0)

 

HCE

29.4

(29.2, 29.6)

36.1

(35.7, 36.6)

38.4

(38.1, 39.0)

52.5

(52.1, 53.0)

Neonate

No HCE

19.2

(19.1, 19.4)

28.4

(27.9, 29.0)

37.8

(37.2, 38.3)

42.3

(41.9, 42.6)

 

HCE

17.6

(17.3, 17.8)

28.9

(28.4, 30.0)

37.9

(37.3, 38.4)

45.1

(44.6, 45.4)

  1. Table 1 shows the individual-level performance as the median value and uncertainty interval (UI) across 500 test-train splits using different probbase matrices for prediction, by age group, with and without health care experience (HCE) questions included. InSilicoVA was run without training using the default probbase, with an empirical probbase derived from training data mapped to the InterVA format, and with an empirical probbase derived from training data mapped to the Tariff 2.0 format. Previously published Tariff 2.0 results are shown for comparison