ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024
Robustness assessment of regressions using cluster analysis typologies: a bootstrap procedure with application in state sequence analysis.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploratory Biomarker-Defined Phenotypic Heterogeneity Beyond a Single Physiological Reserve Construct.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Unveiling the molecular mechanisms of stigmasterol on diabetic retinopathy: BNM framework construction and experimental validation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
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
backgroundIn standard Sequence Analysis, similar trajectories are clustered together to create a typology of trajectories, which is then often used to evaluate the association between sequence patterns and covariates inside regression models. The sampling uncertainty, which affects both the derivation of the typology and the associated regressions, is typically ignored in this analysis, an oversight that may lead to wrong statistical conclusions. We propose utilising sampling variation to derive new estimates that further inform on the association of interest.
methodsWe introduce a novel procedure to assess the robustness of regression results obtained from the standard analysis. Bootstrap samples are drawn from the data, and for each bootstrap, a new typology replicating the original one is constructed, followed by the estimation of the corresponding regression models. The bootstrap estimates are then combined using a multilevel modelling framework that mimics a meta-analysis. The fitted values from this multilevel model allow to account for the sampling uncertainty in the inferential analysis. We illustrate the methodology by applying it to the study of healthcare utilisation trajectories in a Swiss cohort of diabetic patients.
resultsThe procedure provides robust estimates for an association of interest, along with 95% prediction intervals, representing the range of expected values if the clustering and associated regressions were performed on a new sample from the same underlying distribution. It also identifies central and borderline trajectories within each cluster. Regarding the illustrative application, while there was evidence of an association between regular lipid testing and subsequent healthcare utilisation patterns in the original analysis, this is not supported in the robustness assessment.
conclusionsInvestigating the relationship between trajectory patterns and covariates is of interest in many situations. However, it is a challenging task with potential pitfalls. Our Robustness Assessment of Regression using Cluster Analysis Typologies (RARCAT) may assist in ensuring the robustness of such association studies. The method is applicable wherever clustering is combined with regression analysis, so its relevance goes beyond State Sequence Analysis.
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.