Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2603.29539

Tree models for covariate-dependent method agreement with repeated measurements in clinical research

Siranush Karapetyan·Achim Zeileis·Moritz Flick·Bernd Saugel·Alexander Hapfelmeier
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Background: In clinical research, the Bland-Altman analysis is commonly used to assess agreement of metric measurements made by two or more techniques, devices or methods. The approach can also deal with repeated measurements per subject or observational unit. However, a strong and implicit assumption is that agreement of methods is homogeneous across subjects. Objective: To extend the previously introduced multivariable modeling of conditional method agreement with single measurements per subject to the frequent case of repeated measurements. Methods: Appropriate regression trees, called conditional method agreement trees (COAT), are generalized to capture the dependence of the parameters of the Bland-Altman analysis on covariates. These parameters, the expectation and variance of the differences between the methods, are decomposed into subject-specific components to account for repeated measurements. Whilst the theoretical, asymptotic properties of tree models are known, a simulation study was carried out to assess the performance of COAT in finite samples. A comparison of devices measuring cardiac output serves as an application example. Results: COAT is applicable to the two relevant cases of paired and unpaired repeated measurements. In the simulation study, it controlled the type-I error at the nominal level and could detect covariate-dependent method agreement with increasing sample size. The Adjusted Rand Index, a measure of concordance between the estimated and true subgroups, reached very high values close to the maximum of 1. The analysis of cardiac output showed that patients' characteristics may influence the agreement between measuring devices, with implications for use in patient care. Conclusion: COAT can explicitly define subgroups of heterogeneous method agreement in dependence of covariates with appropriate statistical testing in case of repeated measurements.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Siranush Karapetyan, Achim Zeileis, Moritz Flick, Bernd Saugel, Alexander Hapfelmeier. 2026-03-31. Tree models for covariate-dependent method agreement with repeated measurements in clinical research. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.29539

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗