Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28762546›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2017

Dynamic classification using credible intervals in longitudinal discriminant analysis.

David M Hughes, Arnošt Komárek, Laura J Bonnett, Gabriela Czanner, Marta García-Fiñana

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The effect of random-effects misspecification on classification accuracy.The international journal of biostatistics · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

David M HughesDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, U.K.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1287-9994
Arnošt KomárekDepartment of Probability and Mathematical Statistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Laura J BonnettDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, U.K.
Gabriela CzannerDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, U.K.
Marta García-FiñanaDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, U.K.

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2015-08-044Medical Research Council MR/L010909/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently developed methods of longitudinal discriminant analysis allow for classification of subjects into prespecified prognostic groups using longitudinal history of both continuous and discrete biomarkers. The classification uses Bayesian estimates of the group membership probabilities for each prognostic group. These estimates are derived from a multivariate generalised linear mixed model of the biomarker's longitudinal evolution in each of the groups and can be updated each time new data is available for a patient, providing a dynamic (over time) allocation scheme. However, the precision of the estimated group probabilities differs for each patient and also over time. This precision can be assessed by looking at credible intervals for the group membership probabilities. In this paper, we propose a new allocation rule that incorporates credible intervals for use in context of a dynamic longitudinal discriminant analysis and show that this can decrease the number of false positives in a prognostic test, improving the positive predictive value. We also establish that by leaving some patients unclassified for a certain period, the classification accuracy of those patients who are classified can be improved, giving increased confidence to clinicians in their decision making. Finally, we show that determining a stopping rule dynamically can be more accurate than specifying a set time point at which to decide on a patient's status. We illustrate our methodology using data from patients with epilepsy and show how patients who fail to achieve adequate seizure control are more accurately identified using credible intervals compared to existing methods.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremProbabilityClassificationComputer SimulationDecision MakingDiscriminant AnalysisEpilepsyHumansLinear ModelsLongitudinal StudiesMultivariate AnalysisPrognosisRemission InductionSensitivity and Specificityallocation schemecredible intervalslongitudinal discriminant analysis

Identifiers

PMID28762546
PMCPMC5655752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.