Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34438466›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2021

Flexible co-data learning for high-dimensional prediction.

Mirrelijn M van Nee, Lodewyk F A Wessels, Mark A van de Wiel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Penalized regression with multiple sources of prior effects.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Fast Marginal Likelihood Estimation of Penalties for Group-Adaptive Elastic Net.Journal of computational and graphical statistics : a joint publication of American Statistical Association, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, Interface Foundation of North America · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Semi-supervised empirical Bayes group-regularized factor regression.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2022
    Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Mirrelijn M van NeeEpidemiology & Data Science | Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7715-1446
Lodewyk F A WesselsMolecular Carcinogenesis, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mark A van de WielEpidemiology & Data Science | Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical research often focuses on complex traits in which many variables play a role in mechanisms driving, or curing, diseases. Clinical prediction is hard when data is high-dimensional, but additional information, like domain knowledge and previously published studies, may be helpful to improve predictions. Such complementary data, or co-data, provide information on the covariates, such as genomic location or P-values from external studies. We use multiple and various co-data to define possibly overlapping or hierarchically structured groups of covariates. These are then used to estimate adaptive multi-group ridge penalties for generalized linear and Cox models. Available group adaptive methods primarily target for settings with few groups, and therefore likely overfit for non-informative, correlated or many groups, and do not account for known structure on group level. To handle these issues, our method combines empirical Bayes estimation of the hyperparameters with an extra level of flexible shrinkage. This renders a uniquely flexible framework as any type of shrinkage can be used on the group level. We describe various types of co-data and propose suitable forms of hypershrinkage. The method is very versatile, as it allows for integration and weighting of multiple co-data sets, inclusion of unpenalized covariates and posterior variable selection. For three cancer genomics applications we demonstrate improvements compared to other models in terms of performance, variable selection stability and validation.

Indexed as

GenomicsBayes TheoremHumansProportional Hazards Modelsclinical predictionempirical Bayesomicspenalized generalized linear modelsprior information

Identifiers

PMID34438466
PMCPMC9292202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.