Hello. I'm trying to understand if it is possible/statistically sound to compare the percentage of actual complications to some aggregate of the group's individual risk calculated from a risk calculator.

For example, I have a 3 dogs undergoing treatment for clots. Their individual risk estimates of bleeding using a risk calculator were, 40%, 50%, and 60%. Three of them bled. How do I compare my outcome of 100% bleeding to the risk calculators estimate?

I have tried to look online. The closest test I've seen is the Brier test, but I would like to do the opposite of the brier test. I want to compare my performance to the risk calculated for each puppy that I've treated.

Thank you for your time. I appreciate any help.

For example, I have a 3 dogs undergoing treatment for clots. Their individual risk estimates of bleeding using a risk calculator were, 40%, 50%, and 60%. Three of them bled. How do I compare my outcome of 100% bleeding to the risk calculators estimate?

I have tried to look online. The closest test I've seen is the Brier test, but I would like to do the opposite of the brier test. I want to compare my performance to the risk calculated for each puppy that I've treated.

Thank you for your time. I appreciate any help.

Last edited: