ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016
Bagging survival tree procedure for variable selection and prediction in the presence of nonsusceptible patients.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep-learning survival analysis for patients with calcific aortic valve disease undergoing valve replacement.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Improved nonparametric survival prediction using CoxPH, Random Survival Forest & DeepHit Neural Network.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Identification of a gene expression signature associated with breast cancer survival and risk that improves clinical genomic platforms.Bioinformatics advances · 2023Article
- Controlled variable selection in Weibull mixture cure models for high-dimensional data.Statistics in medicine · 2022Article
- Survival Forests with R-Squared Splitting Rules.Journal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2018Article
- A Selective Review on Random Survival Forests for High Dimensional Data.Quantitative bio-science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor clinical genomic studies with high-dimensional datasets, tree-based ensemble methods offer a powerful solution for variable selection and prediction taking into account the complex interrelationships between explanatory variables. One of the key component of the tree-building process is the splitting criterion. For survival data, the classical splitting criterion is the Logrank statistic. However, the presence of a fraction of nonsusceptible patients in the studied population advocates for considering a criterion tailored to this peculiar situation.
resultsWe propose a bagging survival tree procedure for variable selection and prediction where the survival tree-building process relies on a splitting criterion that explicitly focuses on time-to-event survival distribution among susceptible patients. A simulation study shows that our method achieves good performance for the variable selection and prediction. Different criteria for evaluating the importance of the explanatory variables and the prediction performance are reported. Our procedure is illustrated on a genomic dataset with gene expression measurements from early breast cancer patients.
conclusionsIn the presence of nonsusceptible patients among the studied population, our procedure represents an efficient way to select event-related explanatory covariates with potential higher-order interaction and identify homogeneous groups of susceptible patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.