首页> 外文期刊>Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation. >Classification versus association models: Should the same methods apply?
【24h】

Classification versus association models: Should the same methods apply?

机译:分类与关联模型:是否应使用相同的方法?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Association and classification models differ fundamentally in objectives, measurements, and clinical context specificity. Association studies aim to identify biomarker association with disease in a study population and provide etiologic insights. Common association measurements are odds ratio, hazard ratio, and correlation coefficient. Classification studies aim to evaluate biomarker use in aiding specific clinical decisions for individual patients. Common classification measurements are sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Good association is usually a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for good classification. Methods for developing classification models have mainly used the criteria for association models, usually minimizing total classification error without consideration of clinical application settings, and therefore are not optimal for classification purposes. We suggest that developing classification models by focusing on the region of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve relevant to the intended clinical application optimizes the model for the intended application setting.
机译:关联和分类模型在目标,度量和临床环境特异性方面根本不同。关联研究旨在确定生物标志物与研究人群中疾病的关联,并提供病因学见解。常见的关联度量是比值比,危险比和相关系数。分类研究旨在评估生物标志物在协助个别患者特定临床决策中的用途。常见的分类度量是敏感性,特异性,阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。良好的关联通常是良好分类的必要条件,但不是充分条件。用于开发分类模型的方法主要使用关联模型的标准,通常在不考虑临床应用设置的情况下将总分类错误最小化,因此对于分类目的而言并非最佳选择。我们建议通过关注与预期临床应用相关的接收器工作特征(ROC)曲线区域来开发分类模型,以针对预期应用设置优化模型。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号