Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27911830›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2016

Framework for making better predictions by directly estimating variables' predictivity.

Adeline Lo, Herman Chernoff, Tian Zheng, Shaw-Hwa Lo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Adeline LoDepartment of Politics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540.ORCID 0000-0001-5791-5541
Herman ChernoffDepartment of Statistics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138; slo@stat.columbia.edu chernoff@stat.harvard.edu tz33@columbia.edu.
Tian ZhengDepartment of Statistics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 slo@stat.columbia.edu chernoff@stat.harvard.edu tz33@columbia.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4889-0391
Shaw-Hwa LoDepartment of Statistics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 slo@stat.columbia.edu chernoff@stat.harvard.edu tz33@columbia.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We propose approaching prediction from a framework grounded in the theoretical correct prediction rate of a variable set as a parameter of interest. This framework allows us to define a measure of predictivity that enables assessing variable sets for, preferably high, predictivity. We first define the prediction rate for a variable set and consider, and ultimately reject, the naive estimator, a statistic based on the observed sample data, due to its inflated bias for moderate sample size and its sensitivity to noisy useless variables. We demonstrate that the [Formula: see text]-score of the PR method of VS yields a relatively unbiased estimate of a parameter that is not sensitive to noisy variables and is a lower bound to the parameter of interest. Thus, the PR method using the [Formula: see text]-score provides an effective approach to selecting highly predictive variables. We offer simulations and an application of the [Formula: see text]-score on real data to demonstrate the statistic's predictive performance on sample data. We conjecture that using the partition retention and [Formula: see text]-score can aid in finding variable sets with promising prediction rates; however, further research in the avenue of sample-based measures of predictivity is much desired.

Indexed as

high-dimensional datapredictionpredictivityvariable selection

Identifiers

PMID27911830
PMCPMC5167195

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.