Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32184455›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Using the maximum clustering heterogeneous set-proportion to select the maximum window size for the spatial scan statistic.

Wei Wang, Tao Zhang, Fei Yin, Xiong Xiao, Shiqi Chen, Xingyu Zhang, Xiaosong Li, Yue Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Wei Wang *West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Tao Zhang *West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Fei YinWest China School of Public Health and West China Fourth hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiong XiaoWest China School of Public Health and West China Fourth hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Shiqi ChenWomen and Children's Health Management Department, Sichuan Provincial Hospital for Women and Children, Chengdu, China.
Xingyu ZhangDepartment of Systems, Populations and Leadership, University of Michigan, School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, United States.
Xiaosong LiWest China School of Public Health and West China Fourth hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yue MaWest China School of Public Health and West China Fourth hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. gordonrozen@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1980-7520

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The spatial scan statistic has been widely used to detect spatial clusters that are of common interest in many health-related problems. However, in most situations, different scan parameters, especially the maximum window size (MWS), result in obtaining different detected clusters. Although performance measures can select an optimal scan parameter, most of them depend on historical prior or true cluster information, which is usually unavailable in practical datasets. Currently, the Gini coefficient and the maximum clustering set-proportion statistic (MCS-P) are used to select appropriate parameters without any prior information. However, the Gini coefficient may be unstable and select inappropriate parameters, especially in complex practical datasets, while the MCS-P may have unsatisfactory performance in spatial datasets with heterogeneous clusters. Based on the MCS-P, we proposed a new indicator, the maximum clustering heterogeneous set-proportion (MCHS-P). A simulation study of selecting the optimal MWS confirmed that in spatial datasets with heterogeneous clusters, the MWSs selected using the MCHS-P have much better performance than those selected using the MCS-P; moreover, higher heterogeneity led to a larger advantage of the MCHS-P, with up to 538% and 69.5% improvement in the Youden's index and misclassification in specific scenarios, respectively. Meanwhile, the MCHS-P maintains similar performance to that of the MCS-P in spatial datasets with homogeneous clusters. Furthermore, the MCHS-P has significant improvements over the Gini coefficient and the default 50% MWS, especially in datasets with clusters that are not far from each other. Two practical studies showed similar results to those obtained in the simulation study. In the case where there is no prior information about the true clusters or the heterogeneity between the clusters, the MCHS-P is recommended to select the MWS in order to accurately identify spatial clusters.

Identifiers

PMID32184455
PMCPMC7078301

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.