@Article{alr07cas,
  author =               {{Al-Radi}, Osman O. and Harrell, Frank E. and Caldarone, Christopher A.
 and {McCrindle}, Brian W. and Jacobs, Jeffrep P. and Williams, M. Gail and {Van Arsdell}, Glen S
. and Williams, William G.},
  title =                {Case complexity scores in congenital heart surgery: {A} comparative stu
dy of the {Aristotal} {Basic} {Complexity} score and the {Risk} {Adjustment} in {Congenital} {Hea
rt} {Surgery} {(RACHS-1)} system},
  journal =      J Thoracic Cardiovasc Surg,
  year =                 2007,
  volume =               133,
  pages =                {865-874},
  annote =               {clinical prediction rules;use of probability of more concordance and li
kelihood ratio $\chi^2$ for testing differences in discrimination;adequacy index shown with nice
charts, adjusted and unadjusted for background variables}
}

@Article{coo07use,
  author = 		 {Cook, Nancy R.},
  title = 		 {Use and misues of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction},
  journal = 	 Circ,
  year = 		 2007,
  volume =		 115,
  pages =		 {928-935},
  annote =		 {reclassification table;problems with c index;problems with ROC area;example of large change in predicted risk in cardiovascular disease with tiny change in ROC area;possible limits to c index when calibration is perfect;importance of calibration accuracy and changes in predicted risk when new variables are added}
}

@Article{pen07eva,
  author = 		 {Pencina, Michael J. and {D'Agostino Sr}, Ralph B. and {D'Agostino Jr}, Ralph B. and Vasan, Ramachandran S.},
  title = 		 {Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: {From} area under the {ROC} curve to reclassification and beyond},
  journal = 	 Stat in Med,
  year = 		 2007,
  volume =		 26,
  annote =		 {discrimination;model performance;AUC;C-index;risk prediction;biomarker;small differences in ROC area can still be very meaningful;example of insignificant test for difference in ROC areas with very significant results from new method;Yates' discrimination slope;reclassification table;limiting version of this based on whether and amount by which probabilities rise for events and lower for non-events when compare new model to old;comparing two models}
}

@Article{moo03sen,
  author = 		 {Moons, Karel G. M. and Harrell, Frank E.},
  title = 		 {Sensitivity and specificity should be de-emphasized
in diagnostic accuracy studies},
  journal = 	 {Academic Radiology},
  year = 		 2003,
  volume =		 10,
  pages =		 {670-672},
  note =		 {Editorial},
  annote =		 {diagnosis;accuracy;reasons for avoiding sensitivity
and specificity}
}

@ARTICLE{hla84fac,
  author = {Hlatky, M. A. and Pryor, D. B. and Harrell, F. E. and Califf, R.
           M. and Mark, D. B. and Rosati, R. A.},
  year = 1984,
  title = {Factors affecting the sensitivity and specificity of the exercise
          electrocardiography. {M}ultivariable analysis},
  journal = AJM,
  volume = 77,
  pages = {64-71},
  annote = {diagnosis;testing;non-constancy of sensitivity and specificity}
}