↓ Skip to main content

Bagging survival tree procedure for variable selection and prediction in the presence of nonsusceptible patients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bagging survival tree procedure for variable selection and prediction in the presence of nonsusceptible patients
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1090-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cyprien Mbogning, Philippe Broët

Abstract

For clinical genomic studies with high-dimensional datasets, tree-based ensemble methods offer a powerful solution for variable selection and prediction taking into account the complex interrelationships between explanatory variables. One of the key component of the tree-building process is the splitting criterion. For survival data, the classical splitting criterion is the Logrank statistic. However, the presence of a fraction of nonsusceptible patients in the studied population advocates for considering a criterion tailored to this peculiar situation. We propose a bagging survival tree procedure for variable selection and prediction where the survival tree-building process relies on a splitting criterion that explicitly focuses on time-to-event survival distribution among susceptible patients. A simulation study shows that our method achieves good performance for the variable selection and prediction. Different criteria for evaluating the importance of the explanatory variables and the prediction performance are reported. Our procedure is illustrated on a genomic dataset with gene expression measurements from early breast cancer patients. In the presence of nonsusceptible patients among the studied population, our procedure represents an efficient way to select event-related explanatory covariates with potential higher-order interaction and identify homogeneous groups of susceptible patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 27%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 18%
Researcher 4 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 27%
Mathematics 3 14%
Engineering 3 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,131,705
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#1,138
of 7,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,459
of 341,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#12
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,017 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.