Literature DB >> 2324777

A comparison of multivariable mathematical methods for predicting survival--III. Accuracy of predictions in generating and challenge sets.

C K Wells1, A R Feinstein, S D Walter.   

Abstract

This paper concludes a study of "performance variability" when four methods of multivariable analysis--multiple linear regression, discriminant function analysis, multiple logistic regression, and two arrangements of Cox's proportional hazards regression--were applied to the same stratified random samples of "generating sets" containing seven different statistical distributions of cogent biologic attributes in a composite staging system for a large cohort of patients with lung cancer. Each model developed from the generating sets was also applied for predictions in a previously sequestered "challenge set". Across the different generating sets, the multivariable methods showed good agreement with one another in the stepwise choice of first two powerful predictor variables, but not in the sequence of subsequent choices or in the standardized coefficients assigned to the same collection of "forced" variables. In concordance of predictions for individual patients in the generating sets, the overall proportions of disagreement for pairs of methods ranged from 0 to 28%, and kappa values ranged from 0.49 to 1.00. The accuracy of individual predictions showed relatively similar results when the different methods were applied to the same generating set. Across the generating sets, the different methods showed similar total results but substantial variations in predictions for alive and dead patients. When the models from the generating sets were applied for predictions in the challenge set, the results showed an analogous pattern: similar accuracy within models for overall and live/dead predictions, but substantial variations in live/dead predictions across models derived from different generating sources. The results showed that the multivariable methods often had good agreement with one another in predictions for groups but not for individual persons; and that no single method was superior to the others or to the composite staging system. We conclude that multivariable analytic methods may be most effective and consistent if used to find the few most powerful predictor variables, omitting the many other variables that may be "statistically significant" but less cogent. The powerful predictors may sometimes be best constructed, before the analysis begins, as composite variables containing appropriate unions or ordinal arrangements of elemental candidate variables.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2324777     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90122-6

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


  8 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

2.  Incremental diagnostic value of dobutamine stress echocardiography and dobutamine scintigraphy (technetium 99m-labeled sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography) for assessment of presence and extent of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  V Di Bello; C R Bellina; E Gori; N Molea; L Talarico; G Boni; E Magagnini; F Matteucci; D Giorgi; E Lazzeri; A Bertini; M F Romano; R Bianchi; C Giusti
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1996 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Incremental diagnostic value of dipyridamole echocardiography and exercise thallium 201 scintigraphy in the assessment of presence and extent of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  V Di Bello; E Gori; C R Bellina; O Parodi; N Molea; G Santoro; G Mariani; U Conti; E Magagnini; P Marzullo
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1994 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  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

5.  Age, Creatinine and Ejection Fraction Score in Brazil: Comparison with InsCor and the EuroSCORE.

Authors:  Omar Asdrúbal Vilca Mejía; Bruna La Regina Matrangolo; David Provenzale Titinger; Leandro Batisti de Faria; Luís Roberto Palma Dallan; Filomena Regina Barbosa Galas; Luiz Augusto Ferreira Lisboa; Luís Alberto Oliveira Dallan; Fabio Biscegli Jatene
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 2.000

6.  Development of the Post Cardiac Surgery (POCAS) prognostic score.

Authors:  Eduardo Tamayo; Inma Fierro; Juan Bustamante-Munguira; María Heredia-Rodríguez; Pablo Jorge-Monjas; Laura Maroto; Esther Gómez-Sánchez; Francisco Bermejo-Martín; Francisco Alvarez; José Gómez-Herreras
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 9.097

7.  Validation of EuroSCORE II in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery at the National Heart Institute, Kuala Lumpur: a retrospective review.

Authors:  Ahmad Farouk Musa; Xian Pei Cheong; Jeswant Dillon; Rusli Bin Nordin
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2018-05-02

8.  Evaluation of risk scores in predicting perioperative blood transfusions in adult cardiac surgery.

Authors:  N R Madhu Krishna; P S Nagaraja; Naveen G Singh; S N Nanjappa; Karthik Narendra Kumar; V Prabhakar; N Manjunatha
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2019 Jan-Mar
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.