Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2026

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Prevalence-value-accuracy plots: a new method for comparing diagnostic tests based on misclassification costs
A T Remaley1, M L Sampson, J M DeLeo
1National Institutes of Health, Clinical Center, Clinical Pathology Department, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. aremaley@nih.gov
Abstract:
The clinical accuracy of diagnostic tests commonly is assessed by ROC analysis. ROC plots, however, do not directly incorporate the effect of prevalence or the value of the possible test outcomes on test performance, which are two important factors in the practical utility of a diagnostic test. We describe a new graphical method, referred to as a prevalence-value-accuracy (PVA) plot analysis, which includes, in addition to accuracy, the effect of prevalence and the cost of misclassifications (false positives and false negatives) in the comparison of diagnostic test performance. PVA plots are contour plots that display the minimum cost attributable to misclassifications (z-axis) at various optimum decision thresholds over a range of possible values for prevalence (x-axis) and the unit cost ratio (UCR; y-axis), which is an index of the cost of a false-positive vs a false-negative test result. Another index based on the cost of misclassifications can be derived from PVA plots for the quantitative comparison of test performance. Depending on the region of the PVA plot that is used to calculate the misclassification cost index, it can potentially lead to a different interpretation than the ROC area index on the relative value of different tests. A PVA-threshold plot, which is a variation of a PVA plot, is also described for readily identifying the optimum decision threshold at any given prevalence and UCR. In summary, the advantages of PVA plot analysis are the following: (a) it directly incorporates the effect of prevalence and misclassification costs in the analysis of test performance; (b) it yields a quantitative index based on the costs of misclassifications for comparing diagnostic tests; (c) it provides a way to restrict the comparison of diagnostic test performance to a clinically relevant range of prevalence and UCR; and (d) it can be used to directly identify an optimum decision threshold based on prevalence and misclassification costs.
Related Concept Videos
Testing a Claim about Population Proportion
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot

