-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
power.roc.test #1
Comments
Hi eusebe, Do you mean comparing an empirical AUC obtained with the ROC function, to a numeric value? You can use the If you want to compare two AUC where you have only their numeric value, you can also use the parslist method. You will find an explanation of these parameters in Obuchowski & McClish (1997). Hope it helps? Xavier |
Thank you for the quick answer. For example, I would like to reproduce the example 1 of the article. A1 = 1.2, B1 = 1, but there is only one ROC curve and no correlation parameter. With the parslist method, A2, B2, rn and ra seem to be required? David |
Yes, they are required. The example 1 gives a formula to compute A2 (with B2 = B1 = 1, formula 16). But the correlation is absolutely needed to compute the variance. Remember Var(Δ) = Var(θ1) + Var(θ2) - 2 * Cov(θ1, θ2) (formula 3, with Δ = the AUC difference and θ1, θ2 the AUCs). It can make huge difference for very high correlations. Therefore you need to make an estimate on the correlation. |
Hi,
First, thank you of this wonderfull package.
I am trying to use the function 'power.roc.test' from the development version of the package. I would like to compute the sample size needed to compare a single AUC to a theoric value.
Is it possible to define the theoric value of the AUC (For example, if the expected AUC is 0.9, and its theoric value is 0.8) ?
Best,
David
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: