ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022
Evaluating methods for Lasso selective inference in biomedical research: a comparative simulation study.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploratory study on blood and urine transcriptomes for identifying miRNA biomarkers in pediatric febrile bacterial and viral infections.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Temporalis muscle biomarkers from routine brain MRI and risk of dementia in two independent cohorts.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Statistical inference after variable selection in Cox models: a neutral simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Clinical impact of early-onset sepsis on outcomes of necrotizing enterocolitis: a retrospective case-control study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- A multivariate analysis of canonical and non-canonical uses of switch-reference markers in Mbyá narratives.Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory · 2026Article
- Observational
- Development of nomogram model based on LASSO-Logistic regression for predicting postoperative undernutrition to complex anorectal malformation: a pilot exploratory study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Histological Grade, Tumor Breadth, and Hypertension Predict Early Recurrence in Pediatric Sarcoma: A LASSO-Regularized Micro-Cohort Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Associations between household characteristics and environmentally persistent free radicals in house dust from two Australian locations.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Preclinical Implementation of matRadiomics: A Case Study for Early Malformation Prediction in Zebrafish Model.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Article
- A comparison of full model specification and backward elimination of potential confounders when estimating marginal and conditional causal effects on binary outcomes from observational data.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVariable selection for regression models plays a key role in the analysis of biomedical data. However, inference after selection is not covered by classical statistical frequentist theory, which assumes a fixed set of covariates in the model. This leads to over-optimistic selection and replicability issues.
methodsWe compared proposals for selective inference targeting the submodel parameters of the Lasso and its extension, the adaptive Lasso: sample splitting, selective inference conditional on the Lasso selection (SI), and universally valid post-selection inference (PoSI). We studied the properties of the proposed selective confidence intervals available via R software packages using a neutral simulation study inspired by real data commonly seen in biomedical studies. Furthermore, we present an exemplary application of these methods to a publicly available dataset to discuss their practical usability.
resultsFrequentist properties of selective confidence intervals by the SI method were generally acceptable, but the claimed selective coverage levels were not attained in all scenarios, in particular with the adaptive Lasso. The actual coverage of the extremely conservative PoSI method exceeded the nominal levels, and this method also required the greatest computational effort. Sample splitting achieved acceptable actual selective coverage levels, but the method is inefficient and leads to less accurate point estimates. The choice of inference method had a large impact on the resulting interval estimates, thereby necessitating that the user is acutely aware of the goal of inference in order to interpret and communicate the results.
conclusionsDespite violating nominal coverage levels in some scenarios, selective inference conditional on the Lasso selection is our recommended approach for most cases. If simplicity is strongly favoured over efficiency, then sample splitting is an alternative. If only few predictors undergo variable selection (i.e. up to 5) or the avoidance of false positive claims of significance is a concern, then the conservative approach of PoSI may be useful. For the adaptive Lasso, SI should be avoided and only PoSI and sample splitting are recommended. In summary, we find selective inference useful to assess the uncertainties in the importance of individual selected predictors for future applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.