Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38933137›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied statistics2024

Predicting dichotomised outcomes from high-dimensional data in biomedicine.

Armin Rauschenberger, Enrico Glaab

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied statistics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Armin RauschenbergerLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine (LCSB), University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6498-4801
Enrico GlaabLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine (LCSB), University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3977-7469

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In many biomedical applications, we are more interested in the predicted probability that a numerical outcome is above a threshold than in the predicted value of the outcome. For example, it might be known that antibody levels above a certain threshold provide immunity against a disease, or a threshold for a disease severity score might reflect conversion from the presymptomatic to the symptomatic disease stage. Accordingly, biomedical researchers often convert numerical to binary outcomes (loss of information) to conduct logistic regression (probabilistic interpretation). We address this bad statistical practice by modelling the binary outcome with logistic regression, modelling the numerical outcome with linear regression, transforming the predicted values from linear regression to predicted probabilities, and combining the predicted probabilities from logistic and linear regression. Analysing high-dimensional simulated and experimental data, namely clinical data for predicting cognitive impairment, we obtain significantly improved predictions of dichotomised outcomes. Thus, the proposed approach effectively combines binary with numerical outcomes to improve binary classification in high-dimensional settings. An implementation is available in the R package cornet on GitHub (https://github.com/rauschenberger/cornet) and CRAN (https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=cornet).

Indexed as

62-0462H3062J0562J0762P10binary classificationdichotomisationhigh-dimensional dataLinear/logistic regressionnumerical predictionridge/lasso regularisation

Identifiers

PMID38933137
PMCPMC11198132

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.