The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Classification and regression tree analysis in public health: Methodological review and comparison with logistic regression
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Audience segmentation strategies are of increasing interest to public health professionals who wish to identify easily defined, mutually exclusive population subgroups whose members share similar characteristics that help determine participation in a health-related behavior as a basis for targeted interventions. Classification and regression tree (C&RT) analysis is a nonparametric decision tree methodology that has the ability to efficiently segment populations into meaningful subgroups. However, it is not commonly used in public health. PURPOSE: This study provides a methodological overview of C&RT analysis for persons unfamiliar with the procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: An example of a C&RT analysis is provided and interpretation of results is discussed. Results are validated with those obtained from a logistic regression model that was created to replicate the C&RT findings. Results obtained from the example C&RT analysis are also compared to those obtained from a common approach to logistic regression, the stepwise selection procedure. Issues to consider when deciding whether to use C&RT are discussed, and situations in which C&RT may and may not be beneficial are described. CONCLUSIONS: C&RT is a promising research tool for the identification of at-risk populations in public health research and outreach.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000) · doi:10.1002/0471722146 · Cited by 20,302
Breiman, L. (1996) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00058655 · Cited by 16,325
Decision trees: An overview and their use in medicine
Podgorelec, V., Kokol, P., Stiglic, B., & Rozman, I. (2002) · Journal of Medical Systems · doi:10.1023/a:1016409317640 · Cited by 736
Cited by
Development of a Nomogram for Prediction of Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery
Grobman, W. A., Lai, Y., Landon, M. B., Spong, C. Y., Leveno, K. J., Rouse, D. J., Varner, M. W., Moawad, A. H., Caritis, S. N., Harper, M., et al. (2007) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000259312.36053.02 · Cited by 498
Pregnant women with posttraumatic stress disorder and risk of preterm birth
Yonkers, K. A., Smith, M. V., Forray, A., Epperson, C. N., Costello, D., Lin, H., & Belanger, K. (2014) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.558 · Cited by 331
Detecting moderator effects using subgroup analyses
Wang, R., & Ware, J. H. (2013) · Prevention Science · doi:10.1007/s11121-011-0221-x · Cited by 165
Intention to use e-commerce vs physical shopping. Difference between consumers in the post-COVID era
Higueras-Castillo, E., Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J., & Villarejo-Ramos, Á. F. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113622 · Cited by 84
Characterizing user engagement with health app data: a data mining approach
Serrano, K. J., Coa, K. I., Yu, M., Wolff-Hughes, D. L., & Atienza, A. A. (2017) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s13142-017-0508-y · Cited by 67
Mugnier, A., Mila, H., Guiraud, F., Brévaux, J., Lecarpentier, M., Martinez, C., Mariani, C., Adib-Lesaux, A., Chastant-Maillard, S., Saegerman, C., et al. (2019) · Preventive Veterinary Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.104746 · Cited by 70
Target groups for the prevention of late-life anxiety
Smit, F., Comijs, H., Schoevers, R., Cuijpers, P., Deeg, D., & Beekman, A. (2007) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.106.023127 · Cited by 65
Skedgell, K., & Kearney, C. A. (2018) · Children and Youth Services Review · doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.01.043 · Cited by 65
Mining Health App Data to Find More and Less Successful Weight Loss Subgroups
Serrano, K. J., Yu, M., Coa, K. I., Collins, L. M., & Atienza, A. A. (2016) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.5473 · Cited by 53
Leach, C. R., Troeschel, A. N., Wiatrek, D., Stanton, A. L., Diefenbach, M., Stein, K. D., Sharpe, K., & Portier, K. (2017) · Annals of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12160-017-9880-6 · Cited by 40
Baudry, A.-S., Vanlemmens, L., Anota, A., Cortot, A., Piessen, G., & Christophe, V. (2019) · European Journal of Oncology Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2019.09.010 · Cited by 34
Böttcher, S., Bruno, E., Epitashvili, N., Dümpelmann, M., Zabler, N., Glasstetter, M., Ticcinelli, V., Thorpe, S., Lees, S., Van Laerhoven, K., et al. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22093318 · Cited by 23
Finney, C. A., Delerue, F., Gold, W. A., Brown, D. A., & Shvetcov, A. (2023) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2022.12.018 · Cited by 22
Kearney, C. A., & Childs, J. (2023) · Improving Schools · doi:10.1177/13654802231174986 · Cited by 17
Zhang, H., Chen, D., Shao, J., Zou, P., Cui, N., Tang, L., Wang, X., Wang, D., Wu, J., & Ye, Z. (2021) · Risk Management and Healthcare Policy · doi:10.2147/rmhp.s328180 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Lemon, S. C., Roy, J., Clark, M. A., Friedmann, P. D., & Rakowski, W.
- Venue
- Annals of Behavioral Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 172-181
- ISSN
- 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
- 0883-6612
- 1532-4796
- OpenAlex
- W2074840499
- Cited by
- 878
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 24.18
- 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.
