Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24384866›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2014

A primer on predictive models.

Akbar K Waljee, Peter D R Higgins, Amit G Singal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Cataract surgery risk stratification models: a systematic review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Prediction of in-hospital mortality ofBMJ open gastroenterology · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Akbar K Waljee1] Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA [2] Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Peter D R HigginsDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Amit G Singal1] Department of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA [2] Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA.

Funding

Application of Machine Learning Algorithms to Thiopurine Monitoring in IBDR01GM097117 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HIGGINS, PETER D.R. · 2012 to 2016
$1.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM097117
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prediction research is becoming increasing popular; however, the differences between traditional explanatory research and prediction research are often poorly understood, resulting in a wide variation in the methodologic quality of prediction research. This primer describes the basic methods for conducting prediction research in gastroenterology and highlights differences between traditional explanatory research and predictive research.

Identifiers

PMID24384866
PMCPMC3912317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.