Ai Feedback
Exact(5)
These graphs compare the mean predicted risk with the mean observed risk at 5 years for each decile of predicted risk in order.
Thus for both men and women, the mean predicted risks in patients reclassified from high to low risk (and vice versa) with QRISK2 were more accurate compared with the mean observed risk than mean predicted risks with NICE Framingham (see online appendix for low, intermediate, and high risk classification).
Likewise, 25 478 patients would be downgraded from high risk with NICE Framingham to low risk with QRISK2, with a mean observed risk of 13.36% (10.72% to 16.00%).
Fig 1 visually shows the agreement between mean observed risk and mean predicted risk grouped by tenths of predicted risk for all three models.
Fig 2 shows the agreement between mean observed risk and mean predicted risk by 5 year age bands for both men and women.
Similar(55)
We assessed calibration (comparing the mean predicted risk at two years with the observed risk by 10th of predicted risk).
We assessed calibration, comparing the mean predicted risks at 10 years with the observed risk by 10th of predicted risk.
We assessed calibration (comparing the mean predicted risks at 10 years with the observed risk by tenth of predicted risk).
We assessed calibration using one imputed data set (comparing the mean predicted risks at 10 years with the observed risk by tenth of predicted risk).
Interestingly, the highest quartile of BCRAT-assigned risks was the only one in which the mean BCRAT risk did not differ signficantly from the observed risk.
We assessed calibration (comparing the mean predicted risks at one and five years with the observed risk by tenth of predicted risk.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com