Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1950, received 1.5k indexed citations. Written by Patrick Royston, Douglas G. Altman and Willi Sauerbrei covering the research area of Epidemiology, Hepatology and Statistics and Probability. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Epidemiology (199 citations), Surgery (194 citations) and Oncology (193 citations). Published in Statistics in Medicine.

In The Last Decade

doi.org/10.1002/sim.2331 →

Countries where authors are citing Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1002/sim.2331.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026