Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35536987›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of biostatistics2022

A comparison of joint dichotomization and single dichotomization of interacting variables to discriminate a disease outcome.

Sybil Prince Nelson, Viswanathan Ramakrishnan, Paul Nietert, Diane Kamen, Paula Ramos, Bethany Wolf

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of biostatistics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 44% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sybil Prince NelsonDepartment of Mathematics, Washington and Lee University, 204 W Washington St, Lexington, VA 24450, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3803-679X
Viswanathan RamakrishnanDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina.
Paul NietertDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina.
Diane KamenDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina.
Paula RamosDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina.
Bethany WolfDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina.
Medical University of South Carolina · USWashington and Lee University · US

Funding

South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR001450 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T., FLUME, PATRICK A · 2015 to 2024
$41.1M
South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR000062 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T. · 2012 to 2014
$9.4M
Resource CoreP30AR072582 · NIAMS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI JAMES C OATES · 2017 to 2026
$8.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000062NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001450NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR072582
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dichotomization is often used on clinical and diagnostic settings to simplify interpretation. For example, a person with systolic and diastolic blood pressure above 140 over 90 may be prescribed medication. Blood pressure as well as other factors such as age and cholesterol and their interactions may lead to increased risk of certain diseases. When using a dichotomized variable to determine a diagnosis, if the interactions with other variables are not considered, then an incorrect threshold for the continuous variable may be selected. In this paper, we compare single dichotomization with joint dichotomization; the process of simultaneously optimizing cutpoints for multiple variables. A simulation study shows that simultaneous dichotomization of continuous variables is more accurate in recovering both 'true' thresholds given they exist.

Indexed as

CausalityComputer SimulationHumanscutpointsdichotomizationdisease predictionodds ratioYouden’s

Identifiers

PMID35536987
PMCPMC10198136
OpenAlexW4229448739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.