ArticleBiometrics2025
Valid and efficient inference for nonparametric variable importance in two-phase studies.
Article in Biometrics, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We consider a common nonparametric regression setting, where the data consist of a response variable Y, some easily obtainable covariates $\mathbf {X}$, and a set of costly covariates $\mathbf {Z}$. Before establishing predictive models for Y, a natural question arises: Is it worthwhile to include $\mathbf {Z}$ as predictors, given the additional cost of collecting data on $\mathbf {Z}$ for both training the models and predicting Y for future individuals? Therefore, we aim to conduct preliminary investigations to infer importance of $\mathbf {Z}$ in predicting Y in the presence of $\mathbf {X}$. To achieve this goal, we propose a nonparametric variable importance measure for $\mathbf {Z}$. It is defined as a parameter that aggregates maximum potential contributions of $\mathbf {Z}$ in single or multiple predictive models, with contributions quantified by general loss functions. Considering two-phase data that provide a large number of observations for $(Y,\mathbf {X})$ with the expensive $\mathbf {Z}$ measured only in a small subsample, we develop a novel approach to infer the proposed importance measure, accommodating missingness of $\mathbf {Z}$ in the sample by substituting functions of $(Y,\mathbf {X})$ for each individual's contribution to the predictive loss of models involving $\mathbf {Z}$. Our approach attains unified and efficient inference regardless of whether $\mathbf {Z}$ makes zero or positive contribution to predicting Y, a desirable yet surprising property owing to data incompleteness. As intermediate steps of our theoretical development, we establish novel results in two relevant research areas, semi-supervised inference and two-phase nonparametric estimation. Numerical results from both simulated and real data demonstrate superior performance of our approach.
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.