Washington Irving
@irvingwashington22.bsky.social
26 followers 53 following 160 posts
respect sampling variability
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
I hit some combination of keys that reloaded some packages and undid some of my data cleaning (eg, scaled vars were gone). This has happened to me a few times before.

Anyone have any thoughts what this is? #rstats
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
Without gtsummary and marginaleffects I’d probably have a nervous breakdown.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
It’s a bunch of tiny regressions standing on its others shoulders, wearing and oversized trench coat to give the impression of being some kind of large, unconquerable super-being.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
Hoo boy, this is good stuff.

Anyone whose work involves health disparities should read this!
irenetrampoline.bsky.social
tl;dr Healthcare access disparities cascade through the entire ML pipeline.

Check out our working paper here: arxiv.org/pdf/2412.07712
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
Regression modeling strategies by @f2harrell.bsky.social is amongst the best out there, imo.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
One of my all time favorite comedic dyads.

Just amazing on so many levels.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
As an aside, I thought I was gonna get fired once when I casually added this paper to a meeting chat where some big time clinical researches were presenting some data and the working paper title was ‘finally, an externally validated sepsis prediction algorithm’ or something along those lines 🤦‍♂️
Reposted by Washington Irving
rbly.bsky.social
Yeah, main issue seems to be that everyone can get their hands on some data and can publish a model. I mean, that was part of what I did for my PhD. I'm not entirely sure the problem is just validation though, I tend to follow van Calster et al's thinking on this: doi.org/10.1186/s129...
There is no such thing as a validated prediction model - BMC Medicine
Background Clinical prediction models should be validated before implementation in clinical practice. But is favorable performance at internal validation or one external validation sufficient to claim that a prediction model works well in the intended clinical context? Main body We argue to the contrary because (1) patient populations vary, (2) measurement procedures vary, and (3) populations and measurements change over time. Hence, we have to expect heterogeneity in model performance between locations and settings, and across time. It follows that prediction models are never truly validated. This does not imply that validation is not important. Rather, the current focus on developing new models should shift to a focus on more extensive, well-conducted, and well-reported validation studies of promising models. Conclusion Principled validation strategies are needed to understand and quantify heterogeneity, monitor performance over time, and update prediction models when appropriate. Such strategies will help to ensure that prediction models stay up-to-date and safe to support clinical decision-making.
doi.org
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
100%. And the issues raised in this paper (which is great) get to the core if the problem. But very little is done to combat such problems. So we get more and more decision aids, algorithms, etc. but more or less static sepsis mortality in the last 2 decades
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
I dunno, having worked in this field for 10+ yrs, I see more and more algorithms published, but less and less validation. This is a problem in medical research, imo—ppl want to derive and publish their own approach as opposed to validating someone else’s (when that’s even possible).
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
Right. And given the volume of information flowing at clinicians, it doesn’t take much poor performance from the alerts for them to become a nuisance and thus ignored.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
Oh for sure, it’s way more than alert fatigue. There are so many interests in heath care, often working at cross purposes.

Plus, sepsis is a heterogeneous disease and a great deal of existing research essentially ignores this, as if sepsis is clear entity that you either have or don’t have.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
Also, test characteristics for automated sepsis alerts are awful.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
It’s widely recognized amongst clinicians that alert fatigue is real.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
There are medical journals, even high impact ones, filled to the brim with papers drawing conclusions based questionable or even demonstrably incorrect statistical methods. And no one seems to mind.

This keeps me up at night.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
It’s wrong on so many levels.

But also kind of amazing.

But mainly awful.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
I’ll see your lazy and raise you a frightening:

Stepwise variable selection in frequentist framework. Drop those vars into a Bayesian model, declare model ‘correct’ because varying priors doesn’t alter the posterior much.
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
me, today: there was a mistake in the primary key and they resent the data files.

my brain from 1wk ago: sucker! bwaaahahahahhahaha
irvingwashington22.bsky.social
my brain, 1wk ago: i know you're importing, modifying, and merging 300MB of pipe-delimited text files. and i know you don't work with multi datetime formats within the same files that often. but you def DONT need to comment your code about what you did and why. you def only do this task ONCE