Boinggg!
20.12.2025 23:13
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Boinggg!
Doug Altman was an internationally renowned statistician who served as The BMJ’s chief statistical adviser.
Read about life and work that made this statistician a "citation millionaire"
#BMJChristmas
www.bmj.com/content/391/...
I can follow that. Therefore, we state that the paper does not talk about model comparison (including the addition of a predictor to an existing model).
A STRATOS paper with Ewout Steyerberg, @gscollins.bsky.social @laurewynants.bsky.social @maartenvsmeden.bsky.social @vickersbiostats.bsky.social @kdpsingh.bsky.social @gaelvaroquaux.bsky.social @davemclernon.bsky.social @lasaibarrenada.bsky.social K. Kerr T. Hernandez-Boussard C. Moons D. Timmerman
Our guidance regarding performance measures for medical AI models is finally out!
- Stop bashing AUROC, although it does not settle things
- Calibration and clinical utility are key
- Show risk distributions
- Classification statistics (e.g. F1) are improper
www.thelancet.com/journals/lan...
Expertise is having fucked up in enough different ways that you become able to anticipate it.
We need to think more about communication in this context, that is for sure. Clinical staff should not say "your risk is 21%". Just giving an 95% CI in layman terms does not do the job. The uncertainty complicates things quite a lot imo, not sure how to best tackle that to be honest.
In our latest work, we show that risk estimates for patients are HUGELY uncertain due to model, data, and population uncertainty. Even for well performing models (c statistic, calibration, utility) based on large N.
@laure_wynants @ESteyerberg @lasaibarrenada.bsky.social
arxiv.org/abs/2506.17141
Universities love open science
Small print: unless money is involved
Bar chart showing % of articles retracted, with expression of concern, or no action from different publishers. 100% no action from Elsevier and Wolters Kluwer; 100% retraction from Taylor and Francis.
Huge variability documented in how publishers respond when informed about a problematic body of work by a research group. www.jclinepi.com/article/S089...
#publishers #retractions
We recently had 5 review reports for a submission. While the comments were reasonable, the 5 reports were all very similar in the issues they raised. Suspicious.
Multiple Imputation of Missing Covariates When Using the Fine–Gray Model. Edouard F. Bonneville, Jan Beyersmann, Ruth H. Keogh, Jonathan W. Bartlett, Tim P. Morris, Nicola Polverelli, Liesbeth C. de Wreede, Hein Putter. Statistics in Medicine. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/...
You could park many of them in the Journal of Unplanned Interim Analyses.
Seconded.
Any time someone uses this term, make sure they explain exactly what they mean. If they can't, they are obviously trying to bullshit you.
“Volume is a bad driver,” [Sir Mark Walport] said. “The incentive should be quality, not quantity. It’s about re-engineering the system in a way that encourages good research from beginning to end.”
www.theguardian.com/science/2025...
Graeme is clearly on to something here!
What is common knowledge in your field, but shocks outsiders?
Data isn't objective and researchers have innumerable ways to put their thumbs on the scale. Many don't understand statistics well enough to realize they're doing it.
Yes! Some years ago, The Group of Biomedical Sciences at mu uni said in front of an auditorium with many young and local researchers that they wanted to invest more in superstar transfers and compared it with football transfers.
**New Lancet DH paper**
"Importance of sample size on the quality & utility of AI-based prediction models for healthcare"
- for broad audience
- explains why inadequate SS harms #AI model training, evaluation & performance
- pushback to claims SS irrelevant to AI research
👇
tinyurl.com/yrje52fn
Yes.... somehow they always get it wrong. You cannot get to those levels in science and politics and get it right.
yes, subscription model. Fee calculated based on character count of the main paper, including refs, tables, figs. Sounds a bit odd in this digital age.
I recently had a paper in a journal where the fee for open access was lower than the fee for closed access. Is that common? @grahamkendall.bsky.social
Why aren’t you wearing a suit?
Have you said “Thank you” to Greenland and Denmark for allowing you to have a base on Greenland?
Great question! It seems that universities would (secretly?) say yes.
Oh, there's an English version as well! DW reports about misconduct at Max Planck Institutes: www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5nE...
I will be presenting our recent work on individual risk estimation uncertainty at ENAR in New Orleans. Come say hi!
Work with @benvancalster.bsky.social @laurewynants.bsky.social #DoranneThomassen #EwoutSteyerberg
Academia says 'no novelty no glory no funding'
Following the footsteps of Bink Marino!
Quousque tandem?
@kuleuvenuniversity.bsky.social @fwovlaanderen.bsky.social
A lot of publications in MDPI journals also in Flanders, despite it being listed on predatoryjournals.org.
