Risk prediction with machine learning and regression methods

Biometrical Journal

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 601-606

  Steyerberg, Ewout W ^a   van der Ploeg, Tjeerd ^b   Van Calster, Ben ^c  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Location Alkmaar   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Machine learning; Prediction; Regression

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; LEARNING SYSTEMS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK PERCEPTION;

CHRISTIANS; MACHINE LEARNING METHODS; MACHINE-LEARNING; MULTICATEGORY; PREDICTION-BASED; PROBABILITY ESTIMATION; REGRESSION; REGRESSION METHOD; RISK PREDICTIONS;

FORECASTING;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; BIOMETRY; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PROBABILITY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE; UNCERTAINTY;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; BIOMETRY; HUMANS; PROBABILITY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84903607237     PISSN: 03233847     EISSN: 15214036     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201300297     Document Type: Note

References (26)

1. Austin, P. C. and Tu, J. V. (2004). Automated variable selection methods for logistic regression produced unstable models for predicting acute myocardial infarction mortality. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 57, 1138-1146.
2. Austin, P. C., Lee, D. S., Steyerberg, E. W. and Tu, J. V. (2012). Regression trees for predicting mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease: what improvement is achieved by using ensemble-based methods? Biometrical Journal 54, 657-673.
3. Austin, P. C. and Steyerberg, E. W. (2013). Predictive accuracy of risk factors and markers: a simulation study of the effect of novel markers on different performance measures for logistic regression models. Statistics in Medicine 32, 661-672.
4. Austin, P. C., Tu, J. V., Ho, J. E., Levy, D. and Lee, D. S. (2013). Using methods from the data-mining and machine-learning literature for disease classification and prediction: a case study examining classification of heart failure subtypes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 66, 398-407.
5. Breiman, L. (2001). Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Statistical Science 16, 199-215.
6. Harrell, F. E. (2001). Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Springer, New York, NY.
7. Kastrinos, F., Steyerberg, E. W., Mercado, R., Balmana, J., Holter, S., Gallinger, S., Siegmund, K. D., Church, J. M., Jenkins, M. A., Lindor, N. M., Thibodeau, S. N., Burbidge, L. A., Wenstrup, R. J. and Syngal, S. (2011). The PREMM(1, 2, 6) model predicts risk of MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 germline mutations based on cancer history. Gastroenterology 140, 73-81.
8. Kruppa, J., Liu, Y., Biau, G., Kohler, M., König, I. R., Malley, J. D. and Ziegler, A. (2014a). Probability estimation with machine learning methods for dichotomous and multicategory outcome: Theory. Biometrical Journal 56, 534-563.
9. Kruppa, J., Liu, Y., Diener, H. C., Holste, T., Weimar, C., König, I. R. and Ziegler, A. (2014b). Probability estimation with machine learning methods for dichotomous and multicategory outcome: Applications. Biometrical Journal 56, 564-583.
10. Mushkudiani, N. A., Hukkelhoven, C. W., Hernandez, A. V., Murray, G. D., Choi, S. C., Maas, A. I. and Steyerberg, E. W. (2008). A systematic review finds methodological improvements necessary for prognostic models in determining traumatic brain injury outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 61, 331-343.
11. Perel, P., Arango, M., Clayton, T., Edwards, P., Komolafe, E., Poccock, S., Roberts, I., Shakur, H., Steyerberg, E. and Yutthakasemsunt, S. (2008). Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury: practical prognostic models based on large cohort of international patients. British Medical Journal 336, 425-429.
12. Roozenbeek, B., Lingsma, H. F., Lecky, F. E., Lu, J., Weir, J., Butcher, I., McHugh, G. S., Murray, G. D., Perel, P., Maas, A. I. and Steyerberg, E. W. (2012). Prediction of outcome after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: external validation of the IMPACT and CRASH prognostic models. Critical Care Medicine 40, 1609-1617.
13. Royston, P. and Sauerbrei, W. (2008). Multivariable Model-Building: a Pragmatic Approach to Regression Analysis Based on Fractional Polynomials for Modelling Continuous Variables. John Wiley, Chichester, UK.
14. Sauerbrei, W. and Schumacher, M. (1992). A bootstrap resampling procedure for model building: application to the Cox regression model. Statistics in Medicine 11, 2093-2109.
15. Steyerberg, E. W., Eijkemans, M. J. and Habbema, J. D. (1999). Stepwise selection in small data sets: a simulation study of bias in logistic regression analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 52, 935-942.
16. Steyerberg, E. W., Eijkemans, M. J., Harrell, F. E., Jr. and Habbema, J. D. (2000). Prognostic modelling with logistic regression analysis: a comparison of selection and estimation methods in small data sets. Statistics in Medicine 19, 1059-1079.
17. Steyerberg, E. W., Mushkudiani, N., Perel, P., Butcher, I., Lu, J., McHugh, G. S., Murray, G. D., Marmarou, A., Roberts, I., Habbema, J. D. and Maas, A. I. (2008). Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury: development and international validation of prognostic scores based on admission characteristics. PLoS Medicine 5, e165.
18. Steyerberg, E. W. (2009). Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to development, validation, and updating. Springer, New York, NY.
19. Steyerberg, E. W., Moons, K. G., van der Windt, D. A., Hayden, J. A., Perel, P., Schroter, S., Riley, R. D., Hemingway, H., Altman, D. G. and Group, P. (2013). Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 3: prognostic model research. PLoS Medicine 10, e1001381.
20. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression and shrinkage via the Lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 58, 267-288.
21. Van Belle, V. M., Van Calster, B., Timmerman, D., Bourne, T., Bottomley, C., Valentin, L., Neven, P., Van Huffel, S., Suykens, J. A. and Boyd, S. (2012). A mathematical model for interpretable clinical decision support with applications in gynecology. PLoS One 7, e34312.
22. Van Calster, B., Condous, G., Kirk, E., Bourne, T., Timmerman, D. and Van Huffel, S. (2009). An application of methods for the probabilistic three-class classification of pregnancies of unknown location. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 46, 139-154.
23. Van Calster, B., Valentin, L., Van Holsbeke, C., Testa, A. C., Bourne, T., Van Huffel, S. and Timmerman, D. (2010). Polytomous diagnosis of ovarian tumors as benign, borderline, primary invasive or metastatic: development and validation of standard and kernel-based risk prediction models. BMC Medical Research Methodology 10, 96.
24. Van Calster, B., Van Belle, V., Vergouwe, Y., Timmerman, D., Van Huffel, S. and Steyerberg, E. W. (2012). Extending the c-statistic to nominal polytomous outcomes: the Polytomous Discrimination Index. Statistics in Medicine 31, 2610-2626.
25. Van der Ploeg, T., Smits, M., Dippel, D. W., Hunink, M. and Steyerberg, E. W. (2011). Prediction of intracranial findings on CT-scans by alternative modelling techniques. BMC Medical Research Methodology 11, 143.
26. Van Houwelingen, H. C. (2000). Validation. calibration, revision and combination of prognostic survival models. Statistics in Medicine 19, 3401-3415.