142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29225408)
1. A simulation based method for assessing the statistical significance of logistic regression models after common variable selection procedures.
Grogan TR; Elashoff DA
Commun Stat Simul Comput; 2017; 46(9):7180-7193. PubMed ID: 29225408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Stability selection for mixed effect models with large numbers of predictor variables: A simulation study.
Hyde R; O'Grady L; Green M
Prev Vet Med; 2022 Sep; 206():105714. PubMed ID: 35843027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Model selection in medical research: a simulation study comparing Bayesian model averaging and stepwise regression.
Genell A; Nemes S; Steineck G; Dickman PW
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2010 Dec; 10():108. PubMed ID: 21134252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Performance of variable selection methods for assessing the health effects of correlated exposures in case-control studies.
Lenters V; Vermeulen R; Portengen L
Occup Environ Med; 2018 Jul; 75(7):522-529. PubMed ID: 28947495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Performance of using multiple stepwise algorithms for variable selection.
Wiegand RE
Stat Med; 2010 Jul; 29(15):1647-59. PubMed ID: 20552568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Variable selection in logistic regression for detecting SNP-SNP interactions: the rheumatoid arthritis example.
Lin HY; Desmond R; Bridges SL; Soong SJ
Eur J Hum Genet; 2008 Jun; 16(6):735-41. PubMed ID: 18231122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Improved Variable Selection Algorithm Using a LASSO-Type Penalty, with an Application to Assessing Hepatitis B Infection Relevant Factors in Community Residents.
Guo P; Zeng F; Hu X; Zhang D; Zhu S; Deng Y; Hao Y
PLoS One; 2015; 10(7):e0134151. PubMed ID: 26214802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Stepwise model fitting and statistical inference: turning noise into signal pollution.
Mundry R; Nunn CL
Am Nat; 2009 Jan; 173(1):119-23. PubMed ID: 19049440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Variable selection in linear regression models: Choosing the best subset is not always the best choice.
Hanke M; Dijkstra L; Foraita R; Didelez V
Biom J; 2024 Jan; 66(1):e2200209. PubMed ID: 37643390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Statistical model building: Background "knowledge" based on inappropriate preselection causes misspecification.
Hafermann L; Becher H; Herrmann C; Klein N; Heinze G; Rauch G
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Sep; 21(1):196. PubMed ID: 34587892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Re-evaluation of the comparative effectiveness of bootstrap-based optimism correction methods in the development of multivariable clinical prediction models.
Iba K; Shinozaki T; Maruo K; Noma H
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Jan; 21(1):9. PubMed ID: 33413132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Analyzing evidence-based falls prevention data with significant missing information using variable selection after multiple imputation.
Cheng Y; Li Y; Lee Smith M; Li C; Shen Y
J Appl Stat; 2023; 50(3):724-743. PubMed ID: 36819083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Recursive Random Forests Enable Better Predictive Performance and Model Interpretation than Variable Selection by LASSO.
Zhu XW; Xin YJ; Ge HL
J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Apr; 55(4):736-46. PubMed ID: 25746224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Bootstrap model selection had similar performance for selecting authentic and noise variables compared to backward variable elimination: a simulation study.
Austin PC
J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Oct; 61(10):1009-17.e1. PubMed ID: 18539429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Enhancing the prediction of acute kidney injury risk after percutaneous coronary intervention using machine learning techniques: A retrospective cohort study.
Huang C; Murugiah K; Mahajan S; Li SX; Dhruva SS; Haimovich JS; Wang Y; Schulz WL; Testani JM; Wilson FP; Mena CI; Masoudi FA; Rumsfeld JS; Spertus JA; Mortazavi BJ; Krumholz HM
PLoS Med; 2018 Nov; 15(11):e1002703. PubMed ID: 30481186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The relationship between statistical power and predictor distribution in multilevel logistic regression: a simulation-based approach.
Olvera Astivia OL; Gadermann A; Guhn M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 May; 19(1):97. PubMed ID: 31072299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Forward variable selection for random forest models.
Velthoen J; Cai JJ; Jongbloed G
J Appl Stat; 2023; 50(13):2836-2856. PubMed ID: 37720244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The clinical consequences of variable selection in multiple regression models: a case study of the Norwegian Opioid Maintenance Treatment program.
Stavseth MR; Clausen T; Røislien J
Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse; 2020; 46(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 31603346
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparative study of variable selection methods in the context of developing psychiatric screening instruments.
Lu F; Petkova E
Stat Med; 2014 Feb; 33(3):401-21. PubMed ID: 23934941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regression.
Bursac Z; Gauss CH; Williams DK; Hosmer DW
Source Code Biol Med; 2008 Dec; 3():17. PubMed ID: 19087314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
