ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025
Regularized win ratio regression for variable selection and risk prediction, with an application to a cardiovascular trial.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe win ratio has been widely used in the analysis of hierarchical composite endpoints, which prioritize critical outcomes such as mortality over nonfatal, secondary events. Although a regression framework exists to incorporate covariates, it is limited to low-dimensional datasets and may struggle with numerous predictors. This gap necessitates a robust variable selection method tailored to the win ratio framework.
methodsWe propose an elastic net-type regularization approach for win ratio regression, extending the proportional win-fractions (PW) model in low-dimensional settings. The method addresses key challenges, including adapting pairwise comparisons to penalized regression, optimizing model selection through subject-level cross-validation, and defining performance metrics via a generalized concordance index. The procedures are implemented in the wrnet R-package, publicly available at https://lmaowisc.github.io/wrnet/ .
resultsSimulation studies demonstrate that wrnet outperforms traditional (regularized) Cox regression for time-to-first-event analysis, particularly in scenarios with differing covariate effects on mortality and nonfatal events. When applied to data from the HF-ACTION trial, the method identified prognostic variables and achieved superior predictive accuracy compared to regularized Cox models, as measured by overall and component-specific concordance indices.
conclusionThe wrnet approach combines the interpretability and clinical relevance of the win ratio with the scalability and robustness of elastic net regularization. The accompanying R-package provides a user-friendly interface for routine application of the procedures, whenever appropriate. Future research could explore additional applications or refine the methodology to address non-proportionalities in win-loss risks and nonlinearities in covariate effects.
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.