Automated Author ProfileGarcia-Finana, Marta
Garcia-Finana, Marta
Current S-Index
Sum of Dataset Indices for all datasets
Average Dataset Index per Dataset
Average Dataset Index per dataset
Total Datasets
Total datasets for this author
Average FAIR Score
Average FAIR Score per dataset
Total Citations
Total citations to the author's datasets
Total Mentions
Total mentions of the author's datasets
S-Index Interpretation
The S-Index (Sharing Index) is a comprehensive metric that represents the cumulative impact of all your datasets. It is calculated as the sum of Dataset Index scores across all your claimed datasets.
What it means:
- A higher S-index indicates greater overall impact of your datasets relative to typical datasets in their fields of research
- The S-Index grows as you add more datasets or as existing datasets gain more citations and mentions
- It provides a single number to track your research data impact over time
Current S-Index: 1.0 (sum of 2 datasets Dataset Index scores)
More information here.
S-Index Over Time
Cumulative Citations Over Time
Cumulative Mentions Over Time
Datasets
Recently developed methods of Longitudinal Discriminant Analysis allow for classification of subjects into prespecified prognostic groups using longitudinal history of both continuous and discrete biomarkers. The classification utilises Bayesian estimates of the group membership probabilities for each prognostic group. These estimates are derived from a multivariate generalized linear mixed model of the biomarkers longitudinal evolution in each of the groups, which can be updated each time new data is available for a patient, providing a dynamic (over time) allocation scheme. However, the precision of the estimated group probabilities differs for each patient and also over time. This precision can be assessed by looking at credible intervals for the group membership probabilities. In this paper, we propose a new allocation rule that incorporates credible intervals for use in context of a dynamic longitudinal discriminant analysis, and show that this can decrease the number of false positives in a prognostic test, improving the Positive Predictive Value (PPV). We also establish that by leaving some patients unclassified for a certain period of time, the classification accuracy of those patients who are classified can be improved, giving increased confidence to clinicians in their decision making. Finally, we show that determining a stopping rule dynamically can be more accurate than specifying a set time point at which to decide on a patient's status. We illustrate our methodology using data from patients with epilepsy and show how patients who fail to achieve adequate seizure control are more accurately identified using credible intervals compared to existing methods.
Authors
- Hughes, David Michael ;
- Arnošt Komárek ;
- Bonnett, Laura ;
- Czanner, Gabriela ;
- Garcia-Finana, Marta
Recently developed methods of Longitudinal Discriminant Analysis allow for classification of subjects into prespecified prognostic groups using longitudinal history of both continuous and discrete biomarkers. The classification utilises Bayesian estimates of the group membership probabilities for each prognostic group. These estimates are derived from a multivariate generalized linear mixed model of the biomarkers longitudinal evolution in each of the groups, which can be updated each time new data is available for a patient, providing a dynamic (over time) allocation scheme. However, the precision of the estimated group probabilities differs for each patient and also over time. This precision can be assessed by looking at credible intervals for the group membership probabilities. In this paper, we propose a new allocation rule that incorporates credible intervals for use in context of a dynamic longitudinal discriminant analysis, and show that this can decrease the number of false positives in a prognostic test, improving the Positive Predictive Value (PPV). We also establish that by leaving some patients unclassified for a certain period of time, the classification accuracy of those patients who are classified can be improved, giving increased confidence to clinicians in their decision making. Finally, we show that determining a stopping rule dynamically can be more accurate than specifying a set time point at which to decide on a patient's status. We illustrate our methodology using data from patients with epilepsy and show how patients who fail to achieve adequate seizure control are more accurately identified using credible intervals compared to existing methods.
Authors
- Hughes, David Michael ;
- Arnošt Komárek ;
- Bonnett, Laura ;
- Czanner, Gabriela ;
- Garcia-Finana, Marta