Skip to main content

Table 2 C-Statistics, sensitivity, and positive predictive value by five risk adjustment models and three outcome thresholds

From: Comparison of alternative risk adjustment measures for predictive modeling: high risk patient case finding using Taiwan's National Health Insurance claims

   Model 1:
Demo (sex, ages)
Model 2:
ACGs & Demo
Model 3:
ADGs, Sel. EDCs & Demo.
Model 4:
2002 expenditures & Demo.
Model 5:
ADGs, Sel. EDCs, 2002 expenditures & Demo.
Outcome: 2003 top 0.5% user (N = 242)
C-Statistics 0.773 0.849 0.893 0.904 0.913
Top 0.5% predicted group % identified 0.52% 0.49% 0.48% 0.49% 0.48%
  sensitivity 0.021 0.037 0.343 0.450 0.450
  PPV 0.019 0.037 0.347 0.447 0.456
Top 5% predicted group % identified 5.03% 4.85% 4.89% 4.94% 4.83%
  sensitivity 0.169 0.360 0.665 0.698 0.707
  PPV 0.017 0.036 0.067 0.069 0.072
Outcome: 2003 top 1% user (N = 492)
C-Statistics 0.797 0.860 0.893 0.900 0.907
Top 1% predicted group % identified 0.98% 0.98% 1.01% 1.00% 0.99%
  sensitivity 0.051 0.138 0.313 0.396 0.402
  PPV 0.051 0.140 0.310 0.396 0.403
Top 5% predicted group % identified 4.84% 4.86% 4.88% 4.94% 4.89%
  sensitivity 0.228 0.384 0.598 0.622 0.650
  PPV 0.047 0.079 0.122 0.125 0.133
Outcome: 2003 top 5% user (N = 2,467)
C-Statistics 0.815 0.869 0.884 0.885 0.897
Top 5% predicted group % identified 4.89% 4.89% 4.97% 4.89% 4.93%
  sensitivity 0.258 0.365 0.417 0.467 0.476
  PPV 0.264 0.373 0.419 0.477 0.482
  1. Demo: demographic information (sex and age groups); PPV: positive predictive value