Risk grouping versus risk continuum in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a taxometric test.

Abstract

PURPOSE Two commonly used risk estimation approaches for clinically localized prostate cancer are nomograms and risk grouping. The basic distinction between these 2 approaches is that risk grouping assigns patients to distinct categories while nomograms align patients along a continuum or dimension. We used the taxometric methods developed by Meehl to… (More)
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.110

Topics

Cite this paper

@article{Ingram2010RiskGV, title={Risk grouping versus risk continuum in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a taxometric test.}, author={David G. Ingram and Michael W. Kattan}, journal={The Journal of urology}, year={2010}, volume={184 5}, pages={1937-41} }