Table 4 Prediction performance evaluation using Harrel’s C-Index.

From: The clinical relevance of a polygenic risk score for type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Korean population

 

Model without PRS

Model with standardized PRS

Model with categorized PRS

Model with standardized PRS vs. without PRS

Model with categorized PRS vs. without PRS

Harrell C

95% CI

Harrell C

95% CI

Harrell C

95% CI

C-index difference

p-value

C-index difference

p-value

Model 1

0.567

0.550–0.584

0.623

0.607–0.639

0.603

0.586–0.620

0.056

 < 0.001

0.036

 < 0.001

Model 2

0.586

0.569–0.603

0.631

0.615–0.647

0.613

0.596–0.630

0.045

 < 0.001

0.027

 < 0.001

Model 3

0.637

0.620–0.653

0.668

0.653–0.684

0.655

0.639–0.671

0.032

 < 0.001

0.018

 < 0.001

Model 4

0.656

0.640–0.672

0.684

0.668–0.699

0.672

0.656–0.688

0.027

 < 0.001

0.016

 < 0.001

  1. Model 1: T2DM ~ sex + age; Model 2: T2DM ~ sex + age + family history; Model 3: T2DM ~ sex + age + family history + BMI + SBP + smoking status; Model 4: T2DM ~ sex + age + family history + BMI + SBP + smoking status + HDL + LDL + TG.
Back to article page