IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v13y1993i1p30-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing Prediction Rules and Evaluating Observation Patterns Using Categorical Clinical Markers

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth M. McConnochie
  • Klaus J. Roghmann
  • Joel Pasternack

Abstract

Substantial uncertainty often remains at the time that important diagnostic or therapeutic decisions must be made, despite the availability of multiple clinical indicators. Multiple in dicators may be used to define observation patterns that are associated with the presence or absence of disease. Clinical prediction rules based on groups of observation patterns have been used to quantify probabilities and reduce error rates for some medical problems, but efficient use of multiple indicators remains a major challenge in medical practice. Medical outcomes and clinical observations are frequently categorical. Two statistical techniques appropriate for generating prediction rules from categorical data are logit analysis (LA) and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA). LA and RPA were compared in evaluating observation patterns for fractures among 666 upper-extremity injuries in children, and in developing prediction rules for selective radiographic assessment. Fracture estimates and error reduc tions provided by RPA and LA were very similar. Each technique generated a set of prediction rules with a range of misclassification probabilities, and evaluated the probabilities of fracture for all observation patterns. LA used more information than RPA in observation pattern evaluations, however, and provided fracture estimates specific to each pattern. With currently available statistical software, RPA output provides better statistical guidance in generating prediction rules, whereas LA provides more statistical information of use in evaluating ob servation patterns. LA warrants attention similar to that conferred on RPA. It appears that complementary use of LA and RPA would be valuable in developing clinical guidelines. Key words: predictive models; observation patterns; prediction rules; logit analysis; recursive partitioning analysis. (Med Decis Making 1993;13:30-42)

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth M. McConnochie & Klaus J. Roghmann & Joel Pasternack, 1993. "Developing Prediction Rules and Evaluating Observation Patterns Using Categorical Clinical Markers," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 13(1), pages 30-42, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:13:y:1993:i:1:p:30-42
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9301300105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9301300105
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X9301300105?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:13:y:1993:i:1:p:30-42. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.