ArticleJournal of the American Statistical Association2026
Optimizing Sequential Decision Rules for Prostate Cancer Biopsy Management: A Multi-Objective Statistical Framework.
Article in Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Binary medical decision-making increasingly demands sequential diagnostic strategies that optimize accuracy while minimizing patient burden and healthcare costs. In prostate cancer diagnosis, many patients undergo unnecessary biopsies despite existing biomarkers and imaging tests that already inform risk stratification. Sequential testing, where tests are selectively administered based on prior results, offers a promising approach to balance diagnostic power with procedural efficiency. We propose a novel framework for deriving optimal sequential decision rules using a multi-objective optimization perspective. Specifically, we aim to (1) minimize unnecessary invasive procedures while maintaining sensitivity to underlying disease, and (2) reduce procedural costs by limiting the number of subsequent tests. Rather than collapsing multiple goals into a single weighted score, which forces subjective choices about trade-off weights, we optimize one target while requiring the others to meet prespecified standards. This constrained formulation can be solved efficiently using Lagrange multipliers, yielding a family of optimal sequential rules and a trade-off curve that summarizes the best achievable balance among sensitivity, specificity, and testing burden for clinical protocol design. In the prostate cancer diagnostic data with biomarker and imaging measurements and biopsy-confirmed outcomes, the sequential strategies identify testing pathways that reduce unnecessary procedures while preserving diagnostic quality.
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.