Literature DB >> 8896134

Explained variation for logistic regression.

M Mittlböck1, M Schemper.   

Abstract

Different measures of the proportion of variation in a dependent variable explained by covariates are reported by different standard programs for logistic regression. We review twelve measures that have been suggested or might be useful to measure explained variation in logistic regression models. The definitions and properties of these measures are discussed and their performance is compared in an empirical study. Two of the measures (squared Pearson correlation between the binary outcome and the predictor, and the proportional reduction of squared Pearson residuals by the use of covariates) give almost identical results, agree very well with the multiple R2 of the general linear model, have an intuitively clear interpretation and perform satisfactorily in our study. For all measures the explained variation for the given sample and also the one expected in future samples can be obtained easily. For small samples an adjustment analogous to Radj2 in the general linear model is suggested. We discuss some aspects of application and recommend the routine use of a suitable measure of explained variation for logistic models.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8896134     DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19961015)15:19<1987::AID-SIM318>3.0.CO;2-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  55 in total

1.  Health insurance coverage of the children of immigrants in the United States.

Authors:  F Y Huang
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  1997-06

2.  External validity of risk models: Use of benchmark values to disentangle a case-mix effect from incorrect coefficients.

Authors:  Yvonne Vergouwe; Karel G M Moons; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-08-31       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Melanocytic nevi, nevus genes, and melanoma risk in a large case-control study in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Julia A Newton-Bishop; Yu-Mei Chang; Mark M Iles; John C Taylor; Bert Bakker; May Chan; Susan Leake; Birute Karpavicius; Sue Haynes; Elaine Fitzgibbon; Faye Elliott; Peter A Kanetsky; Mark Harland; Jennifer H Barrett; D Timothy Bishop
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Integrating the predictiveness of a marker with its performance as a classifier.

Authors:  Margaret S Pepe; Ziding Feng; Ying Huang; Gary Longton; Ross Prentice; Ian M Thompson; Yingye Zheng
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-11-02       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Evaluating the predictiveness of a continuous marker.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Margaret Sullivan Pepe; Ziding Feng
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-05-08       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Quality of embryos transferred and progesterone levels are the most important predictors of live birth after fresh embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Qianfang Cai; Fei Wan; Dina Appleby; Linli Hu; Hanwang Zhang
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  lordif: An R Package for Detecting Differential Item Functioning Using Iterative Hybrid Ordinal Logistic Regression/Item Response Theory and Monte Carlo Simulations.

Authors:  Seung W Choi; Laura E Gibbons; Paul K Crane
Journal:  J Stat Softw       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 6.440

8.  Empirical determinants of measles metapopulation dynamics in England and Wales.

Authors:  B Finkenstädt; B Grenfell
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1998-02-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Geographic Variation of Hospice Use Patterns at the End of Life.

Authors:  Shi-Yi Wang; Melissa D Aldridge; Cary P Gross; Maureen Canavan; Emily Cherlin; Rosemary Johnson-Hurzeler; Elizabeth Bradley
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 2.947

10.  Prediction Accuracy Measures for a Nonlinear Model and for Right-Censored Time-to-Event Data.

Authors:  Gang Li; Xiaoyan Wang
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 5.033

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.