Strategies for validation.

National Cancer Institute monograph Pub Date : 1985-05-01
R A Lew
{"title":"Strategies for validation.","authors":"R A Lew","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The easy-to-use statistical package has imposed a new hardship on the clinical researcher: too much complicated analysis. The problem is most acute in the interpretation of multivariate results that select a combination of several factors that \"best\" predict or explain medical outcomes. For example, these methods give rise to formulas that 1) weigh together the risk factors of smoking, blood pressure, and lipid levels as determinants of heart disease, or 2) construct from pathologic and clinical evidence a prognostic profile for disease-free rectal cancer patients. To help the clinician apply these methods, we propose that, on request, statistical packages also produce two sets of calculations that validate the primary analysis: 1) a set of simple tabulations that show how the factors and outcomes used in the primary analysis relate to one another, and 2) the results of alternative analyses that show factors which every analysis selects, factors which only appear in the primary analysis, and those which tend to substitute for one another.</p>","PeriodicalId":76196,"journal":{"name":"National Cancer Institute monograph","volume":"67 ","pages":"161-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1985-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Cancer Institute monograph","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The easy-to-use statistical package has imposed a new hardship on the clinical researcher: too much complicated analysis. The problem is most acute in the interpretation of multivariate results that select a combination of several factors that "best" predict or explain medical outcomes. For example, these methods give rise to formulas that 1) weigh together the risk factors of smoking, blood pressure, and lipid levels as determinants of heart disease, or 2) construct from pathologic and clinical evidence a prognostic profile for disease-free rectal cancer patients. To help the clinician apply these methods, we propose that, on request, statistical packages also produce two sets of calculations that validate the primary analysis: 1) a set of simple tabulations that show how the factors and outcomes used in the primary analysis relate to one another, and 2) the results of alternative analyses that show factors which every analysis selects, factors which only appear in the primary analysis, and those which tend to substitute for one another.

验证策略。
易于使用的统计软件包给临床研究人员带来了新的困难:太多复杂的分析。这个问题在解释多变量结果时最为尖锐,即选择“最好”预测或解释医疗结果的几个因素的组合。例如,这些方法产生了以下公式:1)将吸烟、血压和血脂水平等风险因素作为心脏病的决定因素进行综合权衡,或2)根据病理和临床证据构建无病直肠癌患者的预后概况。为了帮助临床医生应用这些方法,我们建议,根据要求,统计软件包也产生两组计算来验证初级分析:1)一组简单的表格,显示初级分析中使用的因素和结果如何相互关联;2)替代分析的结果,显示每个分析选择的因素,只出现在初级分析中的因素,以及那些倾向于相互替代的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信