arXiv · 2101.01603
Comparing methods addressing multi-collinearity when developing prediction models
Abstract
Clinical prediction models are developed widely across medical disciplines. When predictors in such models are highly collinear, unexpected or spurious predictor-outcome associations may occur, thereby potentially reducing face-validity and explainability of the prediction model. Collinearity can be dealt with by exclusion of collinear predictors, but when there is no a priori motivation (besides collinearity) to include or exclude specific predictors, such an approach is arbitrary and possibly inappropriate. We compare different methods to address collinearity, including shrinkage, dimensionality reduction, and constrained optimization. The effectiveness of these methods is illustrated via simulations. In the conducted simulations, no effect of collinearity was observed on predictive outcomes. However, a negative effect of collinearity on the stability of predictor selection was found, affecting all compared methods, but in particular methods that perform strong predictor selection (e.g., Lasso).}
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Artuur M. Leeuwenberg, Maarten van Smeden, Johannes A. Langendijk, Arjen van der Schaaf, Murielle E. Mauer, Karel G. M. Moons, Johannes B. Reitsma, Ewoud Schuit. 2021-01-05. Comparing methods addressing multi-collinearity when developing prediction models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.01603
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.