Cited by 195Statistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods and ApplicationsStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Augmented backward elimination: a pragmatic and purposeful way to develop statistical models

Open access
Dunkler, Daniela, Plischke, Max, Leffondré, Karen, Heinze, Georg·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Statistical models are simple mathematical rules derived from empirical data describing the association between an outcome and several explanatory variables. In a typical modeling situation statistical analysis often involves a large number of potential explanatory variables and frequently only partial subject-matter knowledge is available. Therefore, selecting the most suitable variables for a model in an objective and practical manner is usually a non-trivial task. We briefly revisit the purposeful variable selection procedure suggested by Hosmer and Lemeshow which combines significance and change-in-estimate criteria for variable selection and critically discuss the change-in-estimate criterion. We show that using a significance-based threshold for the change-in-estimate criterion reduces to a simple significance-based selection of variables, as if the change-in-estimate criterion is not considered at all. Various extensions to the purposeful variable selection procedure are suggested. We propose to use backward elimination augmented with a standardized change-in-estimate criterion on the quantity of interest usually reported and interpreted in a model for variable selection. Augmented backward elimination has been implemented in a SAS macro for linear, logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression. The algorithm and its implementation were evaluated by means of a simulation study. Augmented backward elimination tends to select larger models than backward elimination and approximates the unselected model up to negligible differences in point estimates of the regression coefficients. On average, regression coefficients obtained after applying augmented backward elimination were less biased relative to the coefficients of correctly specified models than after backward elimination. In summary, we propose augmented backward elimination as a reproducible variable selection algorithm that gives the analyst more flexibility in adopting model selection to a specific statistical modeling situation.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0113677

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An augmented backward elimination approach was used to select variables for final adjusted models; this approach has been found to reduce bias in variable selection.

    “An augmented backward elimination approach, which has been found to reduce bias in variable selection, was used to identify variables for the final adjusted models (Dunkler et al., 2014).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dunkler, D., Plischke, M., Leffondré, K., & Heinze, G.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Heinze, Georg
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-11-21
Volume
9
Issue
11
Pages
e113677
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1968850993
Cited by
194
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5
FWCI
4.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • European Commission (241544)
  • Universität Wien
  • Medizinische Universität Wien
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
feature selection, backward elimination, statistical model building, regression coefficient bias, SAS macro, logistic regression, Cox proportional hazards model, linear regression
MeSH terms
Models, Statistical

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