Literature DB >> 2324775

A comparison of multivariable mathematical methods for predicting survival--I. Introduction, rationale, and general strategy.

A R Feinstein1, C K Wells, S D Walter.   

Abstract

This paper and the two following papers (Parts I-III) report an investigation of performance variability for four multivariable methods: discriminant function analysis, and linear, logistic, and Cox regression. Each method was examined for its performance in using the same independent variables to develop predictive models for survival of a large cohort of patients with lung cancer. The cogent biologic attributes of the patients had previously been divided into five ordinal stages having a strong prognostic gradient. With stratified random sampling, we prepared seven "generating" sets of data in which the five biologic stages were arranged in proportional, uniform, symmetrical unimodal, decreasing exponential, increasing exponential, U-shaped, or bi-modal distributions. Each of the multivariable methods was applied to each of the seven generating distributions, and the results were tested in a separate "challenge" set, which had not been included in any of the generating sets. The research was intended not merely to compare the performance of the multivariable methods, but also to see how their performance would be affected by different statistical distributions of the same cogent biologic attributes. The results, which are presented in the second and third papers, were compared for selection of independent variables and coefficients, and for accuracy in fitting the generating sets and the challenge set.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2324775     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90120-e

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  6 in total

1.  Controlling tuberculosis in an urban emergency department: a rapid decision instrument for patient isolation.

Authors:  J T Redd; E Susser
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  A primer of biostatistic and economic methods for diagnostic and prognostic modeling in nuclear cardiology: Part I.

Authors:  L J Shaw; R Hachamovitch; E L Eisenstein; K L Kesler; G V Heller; D D Miller
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1996 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 3.  Proportional hazards (Cox) regression.

Authors:  M H Katz; W W Hauck
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Heterogeneity of prognostic profiles in non-small cell lung cancer: too many variables but a few relevant.

Authors:  Agustín Gomez de la Cámara; Angel López-Encuentra; Paloma Ferrando
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 8.082

5.  Dipyridamole technetium 99m sestamibi myocardial tomography as an independent predictor of cardiac event-free survival after acute ischemic events.

Authors:  D D Miller; H G Stratmann; L Shaw; B R Tamesis; M D Wittry; L T Younis; B R Chaitman
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1994 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  Derivation and validation of a preoperative risk model for postoperative mortality (SAMPE model): An approach to care stratification.

Authors:  Luciana Cadore Stefani; Claudia De Souza Gutierrez; Stela Maris de Jezus Castro; Rafael Leal Zimmer; Felipe Polgati Diehl; Leonardo Elman Meyer; Wolnei Caumo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.