206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30614028)
1. Sample size considerations and predictive performance of multinomial logistic prediction models.
de Jong VMT; Eijkemans MJC; van Calster B; Timmerman D; Moons KGM; Steyerberg EW; van Smeden M
Stat Med; 2019 Apr; 38(9):1601-1619. PubMed ID: 30614028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Regression shrinkage methods for clinical prediction models do not guarantee improved performance: Simulation study.
Van Calster B; van Smeden M; De Cock B; Steyerberg EW
Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Nov; 29(11):3166-3178. PubMed ID: 32401702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Performance of Firth-and logF-type penalized methods in risk prediction for small or sparse binary data.
Rahman MS; Sultana M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Feb; 17(1):33. PubMed ID: 28231767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model using multinomial logistic regression.
Pate A; Riley RD; Collins GS; van Smeden M; Van Calster B; Ensor J; Martin GP
Stat Methods Med Res; 2023 Mar; 32(3):555-571. PubMed ID: 36660777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sample size for binary logistic prediction models: Beyond events per variable criteria.
van Smeden M; Moons KG; de Groot JA; Collins GS; Altman DG; Eijkemans MJ; Reitsma JB
Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Aug; 28(8):2455-2474. PubMed ID: 29966490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Risk prediction models for discrete ordinal outcomes: Calibration and the impact of the proportional odds assumption.
Edlinger M; van Smeden M; Alber HF; Wanitschek M; Van Calster B
Stat Med; 2022 Apr; 41(8):1334-1360. PubMed ID: 34897756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Semi-varying coefficient multinomial logistic regression for disease progression risk prediction.
Ke Y; Fu B; Zhang W
Stat Med; 2016 Nov; 35(26):4764-4778. PubMed ID: 27397539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Developing clinical prediction models when adhering to minimum sample size recommendations: The importance of quantifying bootstrap variability in tuning parameters and predictive performance.
Martin GP; Riley RD; Collins GS; Sperrin M
Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Dec; 30(12):2545-2561. PubMed ID: 34623193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A simulation study of sample size demonstrated the importance of the number of events per variable to develop prediction models in clustered data.
Wynants L; Bouwmeester W; Moons KG; Moerbeek M; Timmerman D; Van Huffel S; Van Calster B; Vergouwe Y
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 68(12):1406-14. PubMed ID: 25817942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessing calibration of multinomial risk prediction models.
Van Hoorde K; Vergouwe Y; Timmerman D; Van Huffel S; Steyerberg EW; Van Calster B
Stat Med; 2014 Jul; 33(15):2585-96. PubMed ID: 24549725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Confidence intervals for multinomial logistic regression in sparse data.
Bull SB; Lewinger JP; Lee SS
Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):903-18. PubMed ID: 16489602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Events per variable (EPV) and the relative performance of different strategies for estimating the out-of-sample validity of logistic regression models.
Austin PC; Steyerberg EW
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Apr; 26(2):796-808. PubMed ID: 25411322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of likelihood penalization and variance decomposition approaches for clinical prediction models: A simulation study.
Lohmann A; Groenwold RHH; van Smeden M
Biom J; 2024 Jan; 66(1):e2200108. PubMed ID: 37199142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Validation and updating of risk models based on multinomial logistic regression.
Van Calster B; Van Hoorde K; Vergouwe Y; Bobdiwala S; Condous G; Kirk E; Bourne T; Steyerberg EW
Diagn Progn Res; 2017; 1():2. PubMed ID: 31093534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Development and validation of clinical prediction models: marginal differences between logistic regression, penalized maximum likelihood estimation, and genetic programming.
Janssen KJ; Siccama I; Vergouwe Y; Koffijberg H; Debray TP; Keijzer M; Grobbee DE; Moons KG
J Clin Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 65(4):404-12. PubMed ID: 22214734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Adaptive sample size determination for the development of clinical prediction models.
Christodoulou E; van Smeden M; Edlinger M; Timmerman D; Wanitschek M; Steyerberg EW; Van Calster B
Diagn Progn Res; 2021 Mar; 5(1):6. PubMed ID: 33745449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Review and evaluation of penalised regression methods for risk prediction in low-dimensional data with few events.
Pavlou M; Ambler G; Seaman S; De Iorio M; Omar RZ
Stat Med; 2016 Mar; 35(7):1159-77. PubMed ID: 26514699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. No rationale for 1 variable per 10 events criterion for binary logistic regression analysis.
van Smeden M; de Groot JA; Moons KG; Collins GS; Altman DG; Eijkemans MJ; Reitsma JB
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Nov; 16(1):163. PubMed ID: 27881078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Applications of Bayesian shrinkage prior models in clinical research with categorical responses.
Bhattacharyya A; Pal S; Mitra R; Rai S
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Apr; 22(1):126. PubMed ID: 35484507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Bring More Data!-A Good Advice? Removing Separation in Logistic Regression by Increasing Sample Size.
Šinkovec H; Geroldinger A; Heinze G
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2019 Nov; 16(23):. PubMed ID: 31766753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
