ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2015
Comparison of two ordinal prediction models: A cancer staging system example.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparisons of cancer staging systems should be based on overall performance in the population.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChoosing to replace or maintain an existing cancer staging system is a difficult task. The system plays a critical role in patient counselling and treatment decision making because the staging system conveys prognosis.
methodsMany issues may be considered when deciding the preferred system (i.e. old or new), such as the level of evidence for one or more factors included in the system or the general opinions of expert clinicians. However, given the major objective of estimating prognosis on an ordinal scale, we argue that the rival staging system candidates should be compared on their ability to predict outcome. We sought to outline an algorithm that would compare two rival ordinal systems on their predictive ability.
resultsWe devised an algorithm based largely on the concordance index, which is appropriate for comparing two models in their ability to rank observations. We demonstrate our algorithm with a prostate cancer staging system example.
conclusionWe have provided an algorithm for selecting the preferred staging system based on prognostic accuracy. It appears to be useful for the purpose of selecting between two ordinal prediction models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25701155What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.