Interval coded scoring systems for survival analysis

ESANN 2012 proceedings, 20th European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks, Computational Intelligence and Machine Learning

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 173-178

  Van Belle, V ^a   Van Huffel, S ^a   Suykens, J A K ^a   Boyd, S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; BIOINFORMATICS; COMPLEX NETWORKS; NEURAL NETWORKS;

B-SPLINE KERNELS; IMPROVING PERFORMANCE; INTERPRETABILITY; REGRESSION PROBLEM; SCORING MODELS; SCORING SYSTEMS; SPARSITY CONSTRAINTS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 84877586944     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. G P Percell. What makes a good clinical decision support system. British Medical Journal, 330:740–741, 2005.
2. K Kawamoto, C A Houlihan, E A Balas, and D F Lobach. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. British Medical Journal, 330:765–773, 2005.
3. J A Osheroff. Improving medication use and outcomes with clinical decision support: a step-by-step guide. Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, Chicago, IL, 2009.
4. L M Sullivan, J M Massaro, and R B D’Agostino. Presentation of multivariate data for clinical use: The framingham study risk score functions. Statistics in Medicine, 23(10):1631–1660, 2004.
5. V Van Belle, K Pelckmans, J A K Suykens, and S Van Huffel. Learning Transforma- tion Models for Ranking and Survival Analysis. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12:819–862, 2011.
6. V Van Belle, K Pelckmans, S Van Huffel, and J A K Suykens. Support vector methods for survival analysis: a comparison between ranking and regression approaches. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 53(2):107–118, 2011.
7. V Van Belle, B Van Calster, D Timmerman, T Bourne, C Bottomley, L Valentin, P Neven, S Van Huffel, J A K Suykens, and S Boyd. A Mathematical Model for Interpretable Clinical Decision Support with Applications in Gynecology. Technical report, 10-170, ESAT-SISTA, K.U.Leuven (Leuven, Belgium), 2010. Submitted for publication.
8. T Hastie and R Tibshirani. Generalized additive models. Chapman and Hall, 1990.
9. C de Boor. A Practical Guide to Splines. Springer, Berlin, 1978.
10. L I Rudin, S Osher, and E Fatemi. Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algo- rithms. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 60(1-4):259–268, 1992.
11. S Boyd and L Vandenberghe. Convex optimization. Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2004.
12. K Pelckmans, M Espinoza, J De Brabanter, J A K Suykens, and B De Moor. Primal-dual monotone kernel regression. Neural Processing Letters, 22(2):171–182, 2005.
13. M Galea, R Blamey, C Elston, and I Ellis. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 22(3):207–219, 1992.
14. V Van Belle, B Van Calster, O Brouckaert, I Vanden Bempt, S Pintens, R Paridaens, F Amant, K Leunen, A Smeets, R Drijkoningen, H Wildiers, M R Christiaens, I Vergote, S Van Huffel, and P Neven. Qualitative assessment of the progesterone receptor and HER-2 improve the Nottingham Prognostic Index for short term breast cancer prognosis. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28(27):4129–4134, 2010.