Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31246349›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2019

PSICA: Decision trees for probabilistic subgroup identification with categorical treatments.

Oleg Sysoev, Krzysztof Bartoszek, Eva-Charlotte Ekström, Katarina Ekholm Selling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Oleg SysoevDepartment of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3092-4162
Krzysztof BartoszekDepartment of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Eva-Charlotte EkströmDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala, Sweden.
Katarina Ekholm SellingDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Personalized medicine aims at identifying best treatments for a patient with given characteristics. It has been shown in the literature that these methods can lead to great improvements in medicine compared to traditional methods prescribing the same treatment to all patients. Subgroup identification is a branch of personalized medicine, which aims at finding subgroups of the patients with similar characteristics for which some of the investigated treatments have a better effect than the other treatments. A number of approaches based on decision trees have been proposed to identify such subgroups, but most of them focus on two-arm trials (control/treatment) while a few methods consider quantitative treatments (defined by the dose). However, no subgroup identification method exists that can predict the best treatments in a scenario with a categorical set of treatments. We propose a novel method for subgroup identification in categorical treatment scenarios. This method outputs a decision tree showing the probabilities of a given treatment being the best for a given group of patients as well as labels showing the possible best treatments. The method is implemented in an R package psica available on CRAN. In addition to a simulation study, we present an analysis of a community-based nutrition intervention trial that justifies the validity of our method.

Indexed as

Decision TreesProbabilityAlgorithmsComputer SimulationHumansPrecision Medicinebootstrapdecision treespersonalized medicinerandom forestsubgroup discovery

Identifiers

PMID31246349
PMCPMC6771862

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.