Hi JMP Community,
I have been studying the Nominal Logistic Fit to determine the value of a Baseline Biomarker to predict the outcome of a Clinical Treatment.
I thought that I understood the concept of the Confusion Matrix: it returns the numbers of True Positive, True Negative, False Positive, and False Negative for a given model for the Training data set and, if defined, the Validation set. However, when I compare the Confusion Matrix to the best outcome from the ROC Table (Maximum SENSITIVITY - (1 - SPECIFICITY) value), I struggle to reconcile the two.
For example I have a a model with a ROC AUC = 0.654 (rather weak association) where the Confusion Matrix returns:
| | Predicted | Predicted |
| | YES | NO |
ACTUAL | YES | 1 | 82 |
ACTUAL | NO | 1 | 278 |
--> which is really bad (actually worst than expected for the ROC AUC value).
For the same model, the ROC Table best combination of SENSITIVITY and SPECIFICITY is:
Prob | 1-SPEC | SENS | SENS - (1-SPEC) | True Pos | True Neg | False Pos | False Neg |
0.2797 | 0.2437 | 0.5060 | 0.2623 | 42 | 211 | 68 | 41 |
--> which is quite bad but more in line with expected outcome of a model with a ROC AUC = 0.654
So, my questions are:
- What is the main difference between Confusion Matrix and the "best" row of the ROC Table?
- Is it because the former use the highest Probability and the latter uses the best SENSITIVITY and SPECIFICITY combination?
- If I were to present these results, what would be the best option to present the Positive Predictive Value and the Negative Predictive Value?
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
TS
Thierry R. Sornasse