Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 12483768

Simplifying a prognostic model: a simulation study based on clinical data.

Abstract

Prognostic models are designed to predict a clinical outcome in individuals or groups of individuals with a particular disease or condition. To avoid bias many researchers advocate the use of full models developed by prespecifying predictors. Variable selection is not employed and the resulting models may be large and complicated. In practice more parsimonious models that retain most of the prognostic information may be preferred. We investigate the effect on various performance measures, including mean square error and prognostic classification, of three methods for estimating full models (including penalized estimation and Tibshirani's lasso) and consider two methods (backwards elimination and a new proposal called stepdown) for simplifying full models. Simulation studies based on two medical data sets suggest that simplified models can be found that perform nearly as well as, or sometimes even better than, full models. Optimizing the Akaike information criterion appears to be appropriate for choosing the degree of simplification.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gareth Ambler, Anthony R Brady, Patrick Royston. 2002-12-30. Simplifying a prognostic model: a simulation study based on clinical data.. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1422

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comprehensive evaluation of differential expression of piRNAs in abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a prevalent and fatal cardiovascular condition characterized by a high incidence rate and nonspecific clinical manifestations, with no effective preventive or therapeutic measures currently available. Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) have been identified as significant biomarkers for disease diagnosis due to their essential functions in transposon suppression, maintenance of genomic stability, immune response, and epigenetic modulation. The piRNA is intimately associated with various diseases such as cardiac hypertrophy, tumors, and neurodegeneration, yet its role in AAA is unclear. In this study, we employed gene sequencing to analyze the piRNA expression profiles in AAA vascular tissues and predicted variations in their target genes. Our findings revealed a total of 1368 piRNAs with abnormal expression in the AAA group relative to the control group, including 1240 up-regulated and 128 down-regulated piRNAs (|log2(fold change)|&#xa0;&#x2265;&#xa0;1.0), with 82 demonstrating significant differences (P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05). Through bioinformatics analysis, it was determined that the Wnt signaling pathway, calcium signaling, TNF-&#x3b1; and the p53 pathway are crucial mechanisms by which piRNAs contribute to the development of AAA. RT-qPCR confirmed that hsa_piR_011324 was the most significantly up-regulated piRNA in AAA (P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.0001), corroborating RNA sequencing results. Further results indicate that hsa_piR_011324 promotes phenotypic transformation of human aortic vascular smooth muscle cells (HAVSMCs), enhances the activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), increased up-regulation of inflammation-related markers IL-1&#x3b2; and TNF-&#x3b1;, and induces apoptotic processes. In conclusion, the present study emphasizes the important regulatory role of hsa_piR_011324 in AAA, suggesting that it holds promise as a prospective target for diagnostic and therapeutic intervention.

Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal↗

Abdominal aortic aneurysms: elective endovascular repair versus conventional surgery--evaluation with evidence-based medicine techniques.

PURPOSE: To use evidence-based techniques to compare elective open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with endovascular repair by means of stent placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A focused clinical question formed the basis of a literature search. Evidence-based criteria were used to appraise and assign a "level of evidence" to retrieved articles. The following data were determined from the best studies: systemic, local, and/or vascular complications; graft failure rates; blood loss; mortality; length of intensive care and/or hospital stay; mid- and long-term outcomes; cost of endovascular repair versus that of surgery; and eligibility for endovascular repair. Absolute risk reductions and/or increases and numbers needed to treat or harm were calculated. RESULTS: The best current evidence came from 22 studies, which showed that there is slight, if any, difference between mortality rates of endovascular repair and surgery. Hospital and/or intensive care stay is shorter, blood loss less, and systemic complications fewer (numbers needed to treat, two to 12) with endovascular repair. Some authors reported a significant increase in local and/or vascular complications with endovascular repair (numbers needed to harm, two to six). Graft failure is significantly more common with endovascular repair (numbers needed to harm, four), and substantive adjunctive interventions are needed. Endovascular repair is more expensive than surgery. CONCLUSION: Elective endovascular repair has short-term benefits compared with surgery. There is slight, if any, difference in mortality. Endovascular repair costs more than surgery. At follow-up, surgical grafts performed better.

Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal↗