© John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
FIGURE 18-6: The classification table for the radiation example.
Overall accuracy: This refers to the proportion of accurate predictions, as shown in the
concordant cells, which are the upper-left and lower-right. Of the 30 individuals in the data set
from Table 18-1, the logistic model predicted correctly
= 0.87, or about 87 percent
of the time. This means with the cut value where you placed it, the model would make a wrong
prediction only about 13 percent of the time.
Sensitivity: This refers to the proportion of yes outcomes predicted accurately. As seen in the
upper-left cell in Figure 18-6, with the cut value where it was placed, the logistic model predicted
13 of the 15 observed deaths (yes outcomes). So the sensitivity is
= 0.87, or about 87
percent. This means the model would have a false-negative rate of 13 percent.
Specificity: This refers to the proportion of no outcomes predicted accurately. In the lower-right
cell of Figure 18-6, the model predicted survival in 13 of the 15 observed survivors. So, the
specificity is
= 0.87, or about 87 percent. This means the model would have a false-
positive rate of 13 percent.
Sensitivity and specificity are especially relevant to screening tests for diseases. An ideal test would
have 100 percent sensitivity and 100 percent specificity, and therefore, 100 percent overall accuracy.
In reality, no test could meet these standards, and there is a tradeoff between sensitivity and specificity.
By judiciously choosing the cut value for converting a predicted probability into a yes or no
decision, you can often achieve high sensitivity or high specificity, but it’s hard to maximize both
simultaneously. Screening tests are meant to detect disease, so how you select the cut value
depends upon what happens if it produces a false-positive or false-negative result. This helps you
decide whether to prioritize sensitivity or specificity.
The sensitivity and specificity of a logistic model depends upon the cut value you set for the
predicted probability. The trick is to select a cut value that gives the optimal combination of
sensitivity and specificity, striking the best balance between false-positive and false-negative
predictions, in light of the different consequences of the two types of false predictions. A false-
positive screening result from a mammogram may mean the patient is worried until the negative
diagnosis is confirmed by ultrasound, and a false-negative screening results from a prostate
cancer screening may result in a delay in identifying the prostate tumor. To find this optimal cut
value, you need to know precisely how sensitivity and specificity play against each other — that
is, how they simultaneously vary with different cut values. There’s a neat way to do that which
we explain in the following section.
Rocking with ROC curves
The graph used to display the sensitivity/specificity tradeoff for any fitted logistic model is called the
Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) graph. The name comes from its original use during World