Properties of the Projected Length of the Curve (PLC) and Area Swept out by the Curve (ASC) Indices for the Receiver Operating Characteristic (SROC) Curve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several measures have been proposed to summarize the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, including the Projected Length of the Curve (PLC) and the Area Swept out by the Curve (ASC). These indices were first proposed by Lee (Epidemiology 1996; 7:605-611) to avoid certain deficiencies of the traditional Area Under the Curve (AUC) summary measure. More recently meta-analysis methods for assessing diagnostic test accuracy have been developed and the Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic (SROC) curve has been recommended to represent the performance of a diagnostic test. Some properties of the SROC curve were discussed by Walter (Statist. Med. 2002; 21:1237-1256). Here we extend that work to focus on properties of PLC and ASC in the context of SROC curve. Mathematical expressions for these two indices and their variances are derived in terms of the overall diagnostic odds ratio and the magnitude of inter-study heterogeneity in the odds ratio. Expressions for PLC and ASC and their variances are easily computed in homogeneous studies, and their values provide good approximations to the corresponding values for heterogeneous studies in most practical situations. General variances of PLC and ASC are derived by using delta methods, and are found to be smaller if the odds ratio is large. The methods are illustrated using data from two studies, the first being a meta-analysis on the detection of metastases in cervical cancer patients, and the second being a single study of HPV infection and pre-invasive cervical lesions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.101 | 0.379 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".