Classical Regression and Predictive Modeling

被引:5
作者
Cook, Richard J. [1 ]
Lee, Ker-Ai [1 ]
Lo, Benjamin W. Y. [2 ]
Macdonald, R. Loch [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Waterloo, Dept Stat & Actuarial Sci, Waterloo, ON, Canada
[2] Lenox Hill Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, New York, NY 10021 USA
[3] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Neurol Surg, Fresno Campus, Fresno, CA USA
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会; 加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
Association; Causal analysis; Classification; Explained variation; Prediction; Predictive accuracy; NONCONCAVE PENALIZED LIKELIHOOD; VARIABLE SELECTION; INDIVIDUAL PROGNOSIS; RIDGE REGRESSION; DIAGNOSIS TRIPOD; DISCRIMINATION; LASSO; REGULARIZATION; CALIBRATION; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.1016/j.wneu.2022.02.030
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: With the advent of personalized and stratified medicine, there has been much discussion about predictive modeling and the role of classical regression in modern medical research. We describe and distinguish the goals in these 2 frameworks for analysis. METHODS: The assumptions underlying and utility of classical regression are reviewed for continuous and binary outcomes. The tenets of predictive modeling are then discussed and contrasted. Principles are illustrated by simulation and through application of methods to a neurosurgical study. RESULTS: Classical regression can be used for insights into causal mechanisms if careful thought is given to the role of variables of interest and potential confounders. In predictive modeling, interest lies more in accuracy of predictions and so alternative metrics are used to judge adequacy of models and methods; methods which average predictions over several contending models can improve predictive performance but these do not admit a single risk score. CONCLUSIONS: Both classical regression and predictive modeling have important roles in modern medical research. Understanding the distinction between the 2 frameworks for analysis is important to place them in their appropriate context and interpreting findings from published studies appropriately.
引用
收藏
页码:251 / 264
页数:14
相关论文
共 75 条
[1]   Discrimination and Calibration of Clinical Prediction Models Users' Guides to the Medical Literature [J].
Alba, Ana Carolina ;
Agoritsas, Thomas ;
Walsh, Michael ;
Hanna, Steven ;
Iorio, Alfonso ;
Devereaux, P. J. ;
McGinn, Thomas ;
Guyatt, Gordon .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2017, 318 (14) :1377-1384
[2]   The c-index is not proper for the evaluation of -year predicted risks [J].
Blanche, Paul ;
Kattan, Michael W. ;
Gerds, Thomas A. .
BIOSTATISTICS, 2019, 20 (02) :347-357
[3]  
Bolker B., 2016, DESCTOOLS TOOLS DESC
[4]  
Breiman L, 1996, ANN STAT, V24, P2350
[5]   Random forests [J].
Breiman, L .
MACHINE LEARNING, 2001, 45 (01) :5-32
[6]   Prediction of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children undergoing neurosurgery [J].
Byon, H. -J. ;
Lim, C. -W. ;
Lee, J. -H. ;
Park, Y. -H. ;
Kim, H. -S. ;
Kim, C. -S. ;
Kim, J. -T. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2013, 110 (04) :586-591
[7]   Personalized Medicine: Progress and Promise [J].
Chan, Isaac S. ;
Ginsburg, Geoffrey S. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF GENOMICS AND HUMAN GENETICS, VOL 12, 2011, 12 :217-244
[8]  
CHEN K, 2019, Package "spelling, DOI DOI 10.HTTPS://CRAN.R-PROJECT.ORG/WEB/PACKAGES/PLOTMO/INDEX.HTML
[9]   P-POSSUM scoring system for mortality prediction in general neurosurgery [J].
Chen, W. ;
Fong, J. W. H. ;
Lind, C. R. P. ;
Knuckey, N. W. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2010, 17 (05) :567-570
[10]  
Collins GS, 2015, ANN INTERN MED, V162, P55, DOI [10.7326/M14-0697, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.010, 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.025, 10.1111/eci.12376, 10.1136/bmj.g7594, 10.1038/bjc.2014.639, 10.1186/s12916-014-0241-z, 10.1002/bjs.9736, 10.7326/M14-0698]