Table 4 Comparison of the predictive power for CKD incidence between METS-IR and HOMA-IR using time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curves analysis
From: Comparison of METS-IR and HOMA-IR for predicting new-onset CKD in middle-aged and older adults
|  | Harrell’s C-index | Heagerty’s iAUC | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (2 years) | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (4 years) | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (6 years) | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (8 years) | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (10 years) | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (12 years) | Heagerty’s incident/dynamic AUC (14 years) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
METS-IR, (1) | 0.772 (0.760, 0.784) | 0.775 (0.750, 0.799) | 0.769 (0.742, 0.795) | 0.793 (0.777, 0.810) | 0.798 (0.780, 0.814) | 0.780 (0.763, 0.797) | 0.743 (0.721, 0.766) | 0.745 (0.723, 0.767) | 0.741 (0.707, 0.776) |
HOMA-IR, (2) | 0.762 (0.750, 0.774) | 0.767 (0.742, 0.791) | 0.740 (0.711, 0.766) | 0.781 (0.763, 0.798) | 0.788 (0.769, 0.805) | 0.776 (0.757, 0.793) | 0.743 (0.719, 0.766) | 0.740 (0.717, 0.764) | 0.737 (0.704, 0.771) |
METS-IR + HOMA-IR, (3) | 0.773 (0.761, 0.784) | 0.776 (0.752, 0.800) | 0.768 (0.739, 0.795) | 0.794 (0.778, 0.810) | 0.798 (0.780, 0.814) | 0.780 (0.763, 0.798) | 0.744 (0.721, 0.766) | 0.746 (0.724, 0.768) | 0.742 (0.708, 0.776) |
Difference (1)–(2) | 0.010 (0.006, 0.014) | 0.008 (0.001, 0.016) | 0.029 (0.019, 0.041) | 0.013 (0.007, 0.019) | 0.010 (0.004, 0.016) | 0.004 (0.001, 0.010) | − 0.000 (− 0.007, 0.007) | 0.005 (− 0.003, 0.013) | 0.003 (− 0.008, 0.014) |
Difference (1)–(3) | − 0.000 (− 0.001, 0.000) | − 0.001 (− 0.003, 0.000) | 0.002 (− 0.000, 0.004) | − 0.001 (− 0.003, 0.001) | − 0.000 (− 0.002, 0.001) | − 0.000 (− 0.002, 0.001) | − 0.001 (− 0.003, 0.001) | − 0.001 (− 0.004, 0.001) | − 0.001 (− 0.004, 0.001) |
Difference (2)–(3) | − 0.010 (− 0.014, − 0.007) | − 0.009 (− 0.018, − 0.002) | − 0.028 (− 0.039, − 0.018) | − 0.014 (− 0.020, − 0.008) | − 0.010 (− 0.017, − 0.005) | − 0.005 (− 0.010, 0.000) | − 0.000 (− 0.007, 0.005) | − 0.006 (− 0.014, 0.002) | − 0.004 (− 0.015, 0.007) |
P-value: (1) vs. (2) |  < 0.001 | 0.015 |  < 0.001 |  < 0.001 |  < 0.001 | 0.035 | 0.532 | 0.135 | 0.314 |
P-value: (1) vs. (3) | 0.507 | 0.112 | 0.973 | 0.078 | 0.190 | 0.367 | 0.249 | 0.097 | 0.152 |
P-value: (2) vs. (3) |  < 0.001 | 0.003 |  < 0.001 |  < 0.001 |  < 0.001 | 0.047 | 0.444 | 0.104 | 0.245 |