Evaluating variable selection methods for multivariable regression models: A simulation study protocol

Researchers often perform data-driven variable selection when modeling the associations between an outcome and multiple independent variables in regression analysis. Variable selection may improve the interpretability, parsimony and/or predictive accuracy of a model. Yet variable selection can also have negative consequences, such as false exclusion of important variables or inclusion of noise variables, biased estimation of regression coefficients, underestimated standard errors and invalid confidence intervals, as well as model instability. While the potential advantages and disadvantages of variable selection have been discussed in the literature for decades, few large-scale simulation studies have neutrally compared data-driven variable selection methods with respect to their consequences for the resulting models. We present the protocol for a simulation study that will evaluate different variable selection methods: forward selection, stepwise forward selection, backward elimination, augmented backward elimination, univariable selection, univariable selection followed by backward elimination, and penalized likelihood approaches (Lasso, relaxed Lasso, adaptive Lasso). These methods will be compared with respect to false inclusion and/or exclusion of variables, consequences on bias and variance of the estimated regression coefficients, the validity of the confidence intervals for the coefficients, the accuracy of the estimated variable importance ranking, and the predictive performance of the selected models. We consider both linear and logistic regression in a low-dimensional setting (20 independent variables with 10 true predictors and 10 noise variables). The simulation will be based on real-world data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Publishing this study protocol ahead of performing the simulation increases transparency and allows integrating the perspective of other experts into the study design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2024-08-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308543
Citations
28
Primary Topic
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
19.85

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating variable selection methods for multivariable regression models: A simulation study protocol

Lorena Hafermann, Daniela Dunkler, Georg Heinze, Theresa Ullmann et al.
28 citations
PLoS ONE
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
19.85
article

Evaluating variable selection methods for multivariable regression models: A simulation study protocol

Lorena Hafermann, Daniela Dunkler, Georg Heinze, Theresa Ullmann, Christine Wallisch
article en
28 citations

Abstract

Researchers often perform data-driven variable selection when modeling the associations between an outcome and multiple independent variables in regression analysis. Variable selection may improve the interpretability, parsimony and/or predictive accuracy of a model. Yet variable selection can also have negative consequences, such as false exclusion of important variables or inclusion of noise variables, biased estimation of regression coefficients, underestimated standard errors and invalid confidence intervals, as well as model instability. While the potential advantages and disadvantages of variable selection have been discussed in the literature for decades, few large-scale simulation studies have neutrally compared data-driven variable selection methods with respect to their consequences for the resulting models. We present the protocol for a simulation study that will evaluate different variable selection methods: forward selection, stepwise forward selection, backward elimination, augmented backward elimination, univariable selection, univariable selection followed by backward elimination, and penalized likelihood approaches (Lasso, relaxed Lasso, adaptive Lasso). These methods will be compared with respect to false inclusion and/or exclusion of variables, consequences on bias and variance of the estimated regression coefficients, the validity of the confidence intervals for the coefficients, the accuracy of the estimated variable importance ranking, and the predictive performance of the selected models. We consider both linear and logistic regression in a low-dimensional setting (20 independent variables with 10 true predictors and 10 noise variables). The simulation will be based on real-world data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Publishing this study protocol ahead of performing the simulation increases transparency and allows integrating the perspective of other experts into the study design.

PLoS ONEVol. 19(8)
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE), Zimmer Biomet (Germany) (DE), Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AT), Freie Universität Berlin (DE), Medical University of Vienna (AT), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Austrian Science Fund
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
19.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.