Literature DB >> 27570832

Applying an Instance-specific Model to Longitudinal Clinical Data for Prediction.

Emily Watt1, James W Sayre1, Alex A T Bui1.   

Abstract

Dynamic Bayesian Belief networks (DBNs) have been commonly used to represent temporal data in several domains; however, an ideal representation requires a near perfect mapping between the process being modeled and the DBN. Furthermore, DBNs assume a full set of observations collected at a fixed frequency. Bayesian model selection has arisen to address biased inference and underlying assumptions about the data (e.g., distribution, representativeness) to choose a model that best fits the given observations. Per patient case, a Bayesian model is generated to maximize specificity, and the collective set of models is averaged to fit all examples. This paper demonstrates the advantages of patient-specific modeling over a DBN-driven approach. Results evaluating this approach are presented based on models for two longitudinal clinical datasets (neuro-oncology, knee osteoarthritis). Largely, the patient-specific models show improved performance in prediction relative to the DBNs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian model averaging; Dynamic Bayesian Belief network; data mining; imputation; resampling; state-model; temporal modeling

Year:  2011        PMID: 27570832      PMCID: PMC5001560          DOI: 10.1109/HISB.2011.12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc IEEE Int Conf Healthc Inform Imaging Syst Biol        ISSN: 2375-8201


  10 in total

1.  Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians.

Authors:  J Carpenter; J Bithell
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-05-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Using Bayesian networks to analyze expression data.

Authors:  N Friedman; M Linial; I Nachman; D Pe'er
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.479

3.  Assessing response profiles from incomplete longitudinal clinical trial data under regulatory considerations.

Authors:  Craig H Mallinckrodt; S W Scott Clark; Raymond J Carroll; Geert Molenbergh
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.051

4.  Time and chance: the stochastic nature of disease causation.

Authors:  D I W Coggon; C N Martyn
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Apr 16-22       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Direct likelihood analysis versus simple forms of imputation for missing data in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Caroline Beunckens; Geert Molenberghs; Michael G Kenward
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  A comparison of the random-effects pattern mixture model with last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) analysis in longitudinal clinical trials with dropouts.

Authors:  O Siddiqui; M W Ali
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 1.051

7.  Patient-specific models for predicting the outcomes of patients with community acquired pneumonia.

Authors:  Shyam Visweswaran; Gregory F Cooper
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2005

8.  Learning Instance-Specific Predictive Models.

Authors:  Shyam Visweswaran; Gregory F Cooper
Journal:  J Mach Learn Res       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.654

9.  Patient-specific models for lung nodule detection and surveillance in CT images.

Authors:  M S Brown; M F McNitt-Gray; J G Goldin; R D Suh; J W Sayre; D R Aberle
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 10.048

10.  A multiple imputation strategy for clinical trials with truncation of patient data.

Authors:  P W Lavori; R Dawson; D Shera
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1995-09-15       Impact factor: 2.373

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.