Calibration: The Achilles heel of predictive analytics

Publication date

2019-12-16

Authors

Van Calster, Ben
McLernon, David J.
Van Smeden, Maarten
Wynants, Laure
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Bossuyt, Patrick
Collins, Gary S.
MacAskill, Petra
Moons, CarlISNI 0000000390720943
Vickers, Andrew J.

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

Abstract

Background: The assessment of calibration performance of risk prediction models based on regression or more flexible machine learning algorithms receives little attention. Main text: Herein, we argue that this needs to change immediately because poorly calibrated algorithms can be misleading and potentially harmful for clinical decision-making. We summarize how to avoid poor calibration at algorithm development and how to assess calibration at algorithm validation, emphasizing balance between model complexity and the available sample size. At external validation, calibration curves require sufficiently large samples. Algorithm updating should be considered for appropriate support of clinical practice. Conclusion: Efforts are required to avoid poor calibration when developing prediction models, to evaluate calibration when validating models, and to update models when indicated. The ultimate aim is to optimize the utility of predictive analytics for shared decision-making and patient counseling.

Keywords

Calibration, Heterogeneity, Model performance, Overfitting, Predictive analytics, Risk prediction models, General Medicine, Journal Article

Citation

Van Calster, B, McLernon, D J, Van Smeden, M, Wynants, L, Steyerberg, E W, Bossuyt, P, Collins, G S, MacAskill, P, Moons, K G M & Vickers, A J 2019, 'Calibration : The Achilles heel of predictive analytics', BMC Medicine, vol. 17, no. 1, 230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1466-7