IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0295814.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches to incorporating clinical and biological information for the prediction of response to standardized pediatric colitis therapy

Author

Listed:
  • Zhu Wang
  • Jia Nie
  • Xing Song
  • Lee A Denson
  • Jeffrey S Hyams

Abstract

Background: The prospective cohort study PROTECT is the largest study in pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) with standardized treatments, providing valuable data for predicting clinical outcomes. PROTECT and previous studies have identified characteristics associated with clinical outcomes. In this study, we aimed to compare predictive modeling between Bayesian analysis including machine learning and frequentist analysis. Methods: The key outcomes for this analysis were week 4, 12 and 52 corticosteroid (CS)-free remission following standardized treatment from diagnosis. We developed predictive modeling with multivariable Bayesian logistic regression (BLR), Bayesian additive regression trees (BART) and frequentist logistic regression (FLR). The effect estimate of each risk factor was estimated and compared between the BLR and FLR models. The predictive performance of the models was assessed including area under curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Ten-fold cross-validation was performed for internal validation of the models. The estimation contained 95% credible (or confidence) interval (CI). Results: The statistically significant associations between the risk factors and early or late outcomes were consistent between all BLR and FLR models. The model performance was similar while BLR and BART models had narrower credible intervals of AUCs. To predict week 4 CS-free remission, the BLR model had AUC of 0.69 (95% CI 0.67–0.70), the BART model had AUC of 0.70 (0.67–0.72), and the FLR had AUC of 0.70 (0.65–0.76). To predict week 12 CS-free remission, the BLR model had AUC of 0.78 (0.77–0.79), the BART model had AUC of 0.78 (0.77–0.79), and the FLR model had AUC of 0.79 (0.74–0.83). To predict week 52 CS-free remission, the BLR model had AUC of 0.69 (0.68–0.70), the BART model had AUC of 0.69 (0.67–0.70), and the FLR model had AUC of 0.69 (0.64–0.74). The BART model identified nonlinear associations. Conclusions: BLR and BART models had intuitive interpretation on interval estimation, better precision in estimating the AUC and can be alternatives for predicting clinical outcomes in pediatric patients with UC. BART model can estimate nonlinear nonparametric association.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhu Wang & Jia Nie & Xing Song & Lee A Denson & Jeffrey S Hyams, 2024. "A comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches to incorporating clinical and biological information for the prediction of response to standardized pediatric colitis therapy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0295814
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0295814
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0295814&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0295814?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhou, Xiang & Reiter, Jerome P., 2010. "A Note on Bayesian Inference After Multiple Imputation," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 64(2), pages 159-163.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vexler, Albert & Zou, Li & Hutson, Alan D., 2019. "The empirical likelihood prior applied to bias reduction of general estimating equations," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 96-106.
    2. Tanja Laukkala & Tom Rosenström & Anu Kantele, 2022. "A Two-Week Vacation in the Tropics and Psychological Well-Being—An Observational Follow-Up Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-9, August.
    3. Lane F. Burgette & Jerome P. Reiter, 2012. "Modeling Adverse Birth Outcomes via Confirmatory Factor Quantile Regression," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 92-100, March.
    4. Adrian Rauchfleisch & Mike S Schäfer & Dario Siegen, 2021. "Beyond the ivory tower: Measuring and explaining academic engagement with journalists, politicians and industry representatives among Swiss professors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Prince Allotey & Ofer Harel, 2023. "Bayesian Spatial Modeling of Incomplete Data with Application to HIV Prevalence in Ghana," Sankhya B: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 85(2), pages 307-329, November.
    6. Rashid, S. & Mitra, R. & Steele, R.J., 2015. "Using mixtures of t densities to make inferences in the presence of missing data with a small number of multiply imputed data sets," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 84-96.
    7. David Kaplan & Jianshen Chen & Sinan Yavuz & Weicong Lyu, 2023. "Bayesian Dynamic Borrowing of Historical Information with Applications to the Analysis of Large-Scale Assessments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 1-30, March.
    8. Jörg Drechsler, 2015. "Multiple Imputation of Multilevel Missing Data—Rigor Versus Simplicity," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-95, February.
    9. Harrison Quick & Scott H. Holan & Christopher K. Wikle, 2018. "Generating partially synthetic geocoded public use data with decreased disclosure risk by using differential smoothing," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 181(3), pages 649-661, June.
    10. Albert Vexler & Li Zou & Alan D. Hutson, 2016. "Data-Driven Confidence Interval Estimation Incorporating Prior Information with an Adjustment for Skewed Data," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(3), pages 243-249, July.
    11. Maël Leroux & Anne M. Schel & Claudia Wilke & Bosco Chandia & Klaus Zuberbühler & Katie E. Slocombe & Simon W. Townsend, 2023. "Call combinations and compositional processing in wild chimpanzees," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-8, December.
    12. repec:plo:pone00:0030800 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0295814. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.