Visualising statistical models using dynamic nomograms

Amirhossein Jalali, Alberto Alvarez-Iglesias, Davood Roshan, John Newell, Amirhossein Jalali, Alberto Alvarez-Iglesias, Davood Roshan, John Newell

Abstract

Translational Statistics proposes to promote the use of Statistics within research and improve the communication of statistical findings in an accurate and accessible manner to diverse audiences. When statistical models become more complex, it becomes harder to evaluate the role of explanatory variables on the response. For example, the interpretation and communication of the effect of predictors in regression models where interactions or smoothing splines are included can be challenging. Informative graphical representations of statistical models play a critical translational role; static nomograms are one such useful tool to visualise statistical models. In this paper, we propose the use of dynamic nomogram as a translational tool which can accommodate models of increased complexity. In theory, all models appearing in the literature could be accompanied by the corresponding dynamic nomogram to translate models in an informative manner. The R package presented will facilitate this communication for a variety of linear and non-linear models.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. A nomogram to calculate the…
Fig 1. A nomogram to calculate the p-value for a chi-square test statistic [10].
To use the nomogram draw a straight line from the value of the chi-square test statistic through the required degrees to read off the corresponding p-value.
Fig 2. Nomograms for calculating the probability…
Fig 2. Nomograms for calculating the probability of surviving the Titanic disaster using the rms package.
A logistic regression model containing age, sex and passenger class as main effects is displayed on top while a model including all their two-way interactions is shown at the bottom.
Fig 3. Colour-based nomogram representing the probability…
Fig 3. Colour-based nomogram representing the probability of surviving the Titanic disaster in the main effect model using the VRPM package.
Fig 4. Dynamic nomogram of the logistic…
Fig 4. Dynamic nomogram of the logistic model with all three-way interactions fitted to the Titanic data using DynNom function.
The plot represents survival probability (with 95% confidence interval) of 30-year-old females with different ticket classes. The actual explanatory values and their corresponding predictions are given in the ‘Numerical Summary’ tab in S1 Fig, and the ‘Model Summary’ tab is provided in S2 Fig.
Fig 5. Dynamic nomogram for a Poisson…
Fig 5. Dynamic nomogram for a Poisson regression model fitted to the crabs data.
The plot displays the predicted number of additional male partners of female crabs of 24, 28 or 32 centimetres width of either dark or light colour. The actual explanatory values/levels and predictions are given in the ‘Numerical Summary’ tab in S3 Fig.
Fig 6. Relationships between the square root…
Fig 6. Relationships between the square root of ragweed level and the other variables.
Fig 7. Dynamic nomogram for a regression…
Fig 7. Dynamic nomogram for a regression model with a smoothing spline fitted to the ragweed data.
The plot displays the predicted response for ‘day in season’ set at 1, 11, 21, 31, 41, 51, 61, 71, 81 and 91 respectively while fixing all other explanatory variables at the mean/mode as appropriate. The actual explanatory values/levels and predictions are given in the ‘Numerical Summary’ tab in S4 Fig.
Fig 8. Dynamic nomogram for the Cox…
Fig 8. Dynamic nomogram for the Cox proportional hazards model fitted to the lung cancer data.
The Kaplan-Meier plot displays survival curves correspond to 55 and 60 years old males/females (ECOG and weight loss set at their mean). The predicted survival time (with 95% confidence interval) at 250 days is given in the ‘Predicted survival’ tab (S5 Fig) and the actual explanatory values/levels and predictions are given in the ‘Numerical Summary’ tab (S6 Fig).

References

    1. Newell J, Jalali A, Alvarez-Iglesias A, O’Donnell M, Hinde J. Translational Statistics and Dynamic Nomograms. In: 34th Conference on Applied Statistics in Ireland; 2014. p. 73–74.
    1. Allcock HJ, Jones JR, Michel J. The nomogram: The theory and practical construction of computation charts. Pitman; 1950.
    1. Evesham HA. The history and development of nomography. Docent Press; 2010.
    1. Brodetsky S. A First Course in Nomography Bell’s mathematical series. G. Bell and sons, Limited; 1925.
    1. Broadbent S. Some Uses of the Nomogram in Statistics. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics). 1954;3(1):33–43.
    1. Altman DG. Statistics and ethics in medical research: III How large a sample? British Medical Journal. 1980;281:1336–1338. 10.1136/bmj.281.6251.1336
    1. Fagan T. nomogram for Bayes theorem. New England Journal of Medicine. 1975;293(5):257 10.1056/NEJM197507312930513
    1. Held L. A nomogram for P values. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2010;10(1):21 10.1186/1471-2288-10-21
    1. Safari S, Baratloo A, Elfil M, Negida A. Evidence Based Emergency Medicine; Part 4: Pre-test and Post-test Probabilities and Fagan’s nomogram. Emergency. 2016;4(1):48–51.
    1. Boyd WC. A Nomogram for Chi-Square. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1965;60(309):344–346. 10.1080/01621459.1965.10480796
    1. Možina M, Demšar J, Kattan M, Zupan B. Nomograms for visualization of naive Bayesian classifier. In: European Conference on Principles of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Springer; 2004. p. 337–348.
    1. Kattan MW. Nomograms are superior to staging and risk grouping systems for identifying high-risk patients: preoperative application in prostate cancer. Current Opinion in Urology. 2003;13(2):111–116. 10.1097/00042307-200303000-00005
    1. Steyerberg E, Roobol M, Kattan M, Van der Kwast T, De Koning H, Schröder F. Prediction of Indolent Prostate Cancer: Validation and Updating of a Prognostic Nomogram. The Journal of Urology. 2007;177(1):107–112. 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.068
    1. Partin A, Yoo J, Carter H, Pearson J, Chan D, Epstein J, et al. The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. The Journal of urology. 1993;150(1):110–114. 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)35410-1
    1. Levens AS. Nomography. Fearon Publishers, Lear Siegler, Incorporated; 1937.
    1. Banks J. Nomograms. In: Encyclopedia of statistical sciences. Wiley Online Library; 2004.
    1. Yang D. Build Prognostic Nomograms for Risk Assessment Using SAS®. In: Proceedings of SAS Global Forum; 2013.
    1. Zlotnik A, Abraira V, et al. A general-purpose nomogram generator for predictive logistic regression models. Stata Journal. 2015;15(2):537–546. 10.1177/1536867X1501500212
    1. Doerfler R. Creating Nomograms with the PyNomo Software. 2009;.
    1. Jones TB. An online tool for creating custom, interactive nomograms; 2009. Available from: .
    1. Harrell Jr FE. rms: Regression Modeling Strategies; 2017. Available from: .
    1. Xiao N, Xu QS, Li MZ. hdnom: Building Nomograms for Penalized Cox Models with High-Dimensional Survival Data. bioRxiv. 2016;.
    1. Arnholt AT. PASWR: PROBABILITY and STATISTICS WITH R; 2012. Available from: .
    1. Van Belle V. VRPM: Visualizing Risk Prediction Models; 2017. Available from: .
    1. Van Belle V, Van Calster B. Visualizing risk prediction models. PloS one. 2015;10(7):e0132614 10.1371/journal.pone.0132614
    1. Agrawal D. Inappropriate Interpretation of the Odds Ratio: Oddly Not That Uncommon. Pediatrics. 2005;116(6):1612–1613. 10.1542/peds.2005-2269
    1. Rico-Villademoros F. On the Interpretation of Odds Ratios. The Clinical journal of pain. 2012;28(5):462 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318237d659
    1. Davies HTO, Crombie IK, Tavakoli M. When can odds ratios mislead? BMJ. 1998;316(7136):989–991. 10.1136/bmj.316.7136.989
    1. Harrell F. Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic and ordinal regression, and survival analysis. Springer; 2015.
    1. Bowman A, Crawford E, Alexander G, Bowman R. rpanel: Simple Interactive Controls for R Functions Using the tcltk Package. Journal of Statistical Software, Articles. 2007;17(9):1–18.
    1. Chang W, Cheng J, Allaire J, Xie Y, McPherson J. shiny: Web Application Framework for R; 2017. Available from: .
    1. Jalali A, Roshan D, Alvarez-Iglesias A, Newell J. DynNom: Visualising Statistical Models using Dynamic Nomograms; 2019. Available from: .
    1. McCullagh P, Nelder JA. Generalized Linear Models, Second Edition Chapman & Hall/CRC Monographs on Statistics & Applied Probability. Taylor & Francis; 1989.
    1. Madsen H, Thyregod P. Introduction to General and Generalized Linear Models Chapman & Hall/CRC Texts in Statistical Science. CRC Press; 2010.
    1. Wood SN. Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (B). 2011;73(1):3–36. 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00749.x
    1. Hastie TJ. gam: Generalized Additive Models; 2018. Available from: .
    1. Agresti A, Kateri M. Categorical data analysis. Springer; 2011.
    1. Marschner IC. glm2: Fitting generalized linear models with convergence problems. The R Journal. 2011;3 (2) 12–15. 10.32614/RJ-2011-012
    1. Ruppert D, Wand MP, Carroll RJ. Semiparametric regression. 12 Cambridge university press; 2003.
    1. Wand M. SemiPar: Semiparametic Regression; 2018. Available from: .
    1. Therneau TM. A Package for Survival Analysis in S; 2015. Available from: .
    1. Li W, Xie B, Qiu S, Huang X, Chen J, Wang X, et al. Non-lab and semi-lab algorithms for screening undiagnosed diabetes: A cross-sectional study. EBioMedicine. 2018;35:307–316. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.08.009
    1. Kim H, Cutter GR, George B, Chen Y. Understanding and preventing loss to follow-up: experiences from the spinal cord injury model systems. Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation. 2018;24(2):97–109. 10.1310/sci2402-97
    1. Goltz DE, Ryan SP, Hopkins TJ, Howell CB, Attarian DE, Bolognesi MP, et al. A novel risk calculator predicts 90-day readmission following total joint arthroplasty. JBJS. 2019;101(6), 547–556. 10.2106/JBJS.18.00843
    1. Chen QY, Zhong Q, Zhou JF, Qiu XT, Dang XY, Cai LS, et al. Development and External Validation of Web-Based Models to Predict the Prognosis of Remnant Gastric Cancer after Surgery: A Multicenter Study. Journal of oncology. 2019. 10.1155/2019/6012826
    1. Bellam BL, Samanta J, Gupta P, Kumar P, Sharma V, Dhaka N, et al. Predictors of outcome of percutaneous catheter drainage in patients with acute pancreatitis having acute fluid collection and development of a predictive model. Pancreatology. 2019. 10.1016/j.pan.2019.05.467
    1. Andersen MØ, Fritzell P, Eiskjaer SP, Lagerbäck T, Hägg O, Nordvall D, et al. Surgical Treatment of Degenerative Disk Disease in Three Scandinavian Countries: An International Register Study Based on Three Merged National Spine Registers. Global Spine Journal. 2019;2192568219838535. 10.1177/2192568219838535

Source: PubMed

Připravované klinické studie

Předplatit