Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26810254›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2016

Net benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests.

Andrew J Vickers, Ben Van Calster, Ewout W Steyerberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 695 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
695citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

695 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

635 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andrew J VickersDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA vickersa@mskcc.org.
Ben Van CalsterKU Leuven, Department of Development and Regeneration, Leuven, Belgium Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, 's-Gravendijkwal, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Ewout W SteyerbergDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, 's-Gravendijkwal, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Elisa de Stanchina · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
SPORE In Prostate CancerP50CA092629 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI JAMES A EASTHAM · 2001 to 2026
$63.0M
Dynamic, multi-cohort prediction modeling of prostate biopsy outcomeR01CA179115 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI ANKERST, DONNA PAULER, VICKERS, ANDREW J · 2014 to 2018
$2.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30-CA008748NCI NIH HHS P50-CA92629NCI NIH HHS R01 CA179115
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesModels, StatisticalPredictive Value of TestsBiomarkersDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansROC CurveBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID26810254
PMCPMC4724785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.