Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36737800›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2023

Feature-specific inference for penalized regression using local false discovery rates.

Ryan Miller, Patrick Breheny

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2023. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  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

2 authors.

Ryan MillerDepartment of Mathematics, Grinnell College, Grinnell, Iowa, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0446-9992
Patrick BrehenyDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0650-1119

Funding

Viral VectorP30CA086862 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Douglas Robert Spitz · 2000 to 2026
$70.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA086862
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Penalized regression methods such as the lasso are a popular approach to analyzing high-dimensional data. One attractive property of the lasso is that it naturally performs variable selection. An important area of concern, however, is the reliability of these selections. Motivated by local false discovery rate methodology from the large-scale hypothesis testing literature, we propose a method for calculating a local false discovery rate for each variable under consideration by the lasso model. These rates can be used to assess the reliability of an individual feature, or to estimate the model's overall false discovery rate. The method can be used for any level of regularization. This is particularly useful for models with a few highly significant features but a high overall false discovery rate, a relatively common occurrence when using cross validation to select a model. It is also flexible enough to be applied to many varieties of penalized likelihoods including generalized linear models and Cox regression, and a variety of penalties, including the minimax concave penalty (MCP) and smoothly clipped absolute deviation (SCAD) penalty. We demonstrate the validity of this approach and contrast it with other inferential methods for penalized regression as well as with local false discovery rates for univariate hypothesis tests. Finally, we show the practical utility of our method by applying it to a case study involving gene expression in breast cancer patients.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLinear ModelsProbabilityRegression AnalysisReproducibility of Resultsfalse discovery rateshigh-dimensional datahigh-dimensional modelslassopenalized regression

Identifiers

PMID36737800
PMCPMC13234819

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.