Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 957

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Regression Models in Clinical Studies: Determining Relationships Between Predictors and Response

Harre, F. E., Lee, K. L., Pollock, B. G.·1988·JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

Multiple regression models are increasingly being applied to clinical studies. Such models are powerful analytic tools that yield valid statistical inferences and make reliable predictions if various assumptions are satisfied. Two types of assumptions made by regression models concern the distribution of the response variable and the nature or shape of the relationship between the predictors and the response. This paper addresses the latter assumption by applying a direct and flexible approach, cubic spline functions, to two widely used models: the logistic regression model for binary responses and the Cox proportional hazards regression model for survival time data.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jnci/80.15.1198

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Harre, F. E., Lee, K. L., & Pollock, B. G.
Venue
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
1988-10-05
Volume
80
Issue
15
Pages
1198-1202
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2172227211
Cited by
957
References
0
FWCI
3.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.