Classification versus association models: Should the same methods apply?

Ziding Feng

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

19 Scopus citations

Abstract

Association and classification models differ fundamentally in objectives, measurements, and clinical context specificity. Association studies aim to identify biomarker association with disease in a study population and provide etiologic insights. Common association measurements are odds ratio, hazard ratio, and correlation coefficient. Classification studies aim to evaluate biomarker use in aiding specific clinical decisions for individual patients. Common classification measurements are sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Good association is usually a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for good classification. Methods for developing classification models have mainly used the criteria for association models, usually minimizing total classification error without consideration of clinical application settings, and therefore are not optimal for classification purposes. We suggest that developing classification models by focusing on the region of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve relevant to the intended clinical application optimizes the model for the intended application setting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)53-58
Number of pages6
JournalScandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation
Volume70
Issue numberSUPPL. 242
DOIs
StatePublished - 2010

Keywords

  • Association
  • Biomarkers
  • Classification
  • Likelihood
  • Logistic regression
  • Odds ratio
  • ROC curve
  • Sensitivity
  • Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Biochemistry

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Classification versus association models: Should the same methods apply?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this