Cargando…

Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models

BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction models (CPMs) are increasingly deployed to support healthcare decisions but they are derived inconsistently, in part due to limited data. An emerging alternative is to aggregate existing CPMs developed for similar settings and outcomes. This simulation study aimed to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Martin, Glen P., Mamas, Mamas A., Peek, Niels, Buchan, Iain, Sperrin, Matthew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217317/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28056835
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0277-1
_version_ 1782492085085011968
author Martin, Glen P.
Mamas, Mamas A.
Peek, Niels
Buchan, Iain
Sperrin, Matthew
author_facet Martin, Glen P.
Mamas, Mamas A.
Peek, Niels
Buchan, Iain
Sperrin, Matthew
author_sort Martin, Glen P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction models (CPMs) are increasingly deployed to support healthcare decisions but they are derived inconsistently, in part due to limited data. An emerging alternative is to aggregate existing CPMs developed for similar settings and outcomes. This simulation study aimed to investigate the impact of between-population-heterogeneity and sample size on aggregating existing CPMs in a defined population, compared with developing a model de novo. METHODS: Simulations were designed to mimic a scenario in which multiple CPMs for a binary outcome had been derived in distinct, heterogeneous populations, with potentially different predictors available in each. We then generated a new ‘local’ population and compared the performance of CPMs developed for this population by aggregation, using stacked regression, principal component analysis or partial least squares, with redevelopment from scratch using backwards selection and penalised regression. RESULTS: While redevelopment approaches resulted in models that were miscalibrated for local datasets of less than 500 observations, model aggregation methods were well calibrated across all simulation scenarios. When the size of local data was less than 1000 observations and between-population-heterogeneity was small, aggregating existing CPMs gave better discrimination and had the lowest mean square error in the predicted risks compared with deriving a new model. Conversely, given greater than 1000 observations and significant between-population-heterogeneity, then redevelopment outperformed the aggregation approaches. In all other scenarios, both aggregation and de novo derivation resulted in similar predictive performance. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a pragmatic approach to contextualising CPMs to defined populations. When aiming to develop models in defined populations, modellers should consider existing CPMs, with aggregation approaches being a suitable modelling strategy particularly with sparse data on the local population. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0277-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5217317
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52173172017-01-09 Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models Martin, Glen P. Mamas, Mamas A. Peek, Niels Buchan, Iain Sperrin, Matthew BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction models (CPMs) are increasingly deployed to support healthcare decisions but they are derived inconsistently, in part due to limited data. An emerging alternative is to aggregate existing CPMs developed for similar settings and outcomes. This simulation study aimed to investigate the impact of between-population-heterogeneity and sample size on aggregating existing CPMs in a defined population, compared with developing a model de novo. METHODS: Simulations were designed to mimic a scenario in which multiple CPMs for a binary outcome had been derived in distinct, heterogeneous populations, with potentially different predictors available in each. We then generated a new ‘local’ population and compared the performance of CPMs developed for this population by aggregation, using stacked regression, principal component analysis or partial least squares, with redevelopment from scratch using backwards selection and penalised regression. RESULTS: While redevelopment approaches resulted in models that were miscalibrated for local datasets of less than 500 observations, model aggregation methods were well calibrated across all simulation scenarios. When the size of local data was less than 1000 observations and between-population-heterogeneity was small, aggregating existing CPMs gave better discrimination and had the lowest mean square error in the predicted risks compared with deriving a new model. Conversely, given greater than 1000 observations and significant between-population-heterogeneity, then redevelopment outperformed the aggregation approaches. In all other scenarios, both aggregation and de novo derivation resulted in similar predictive performance. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a pragmatic approach to contextualising CPMs to defined populations. When aiming to develop models in defined populations, modellers should consider existing CPMs, with aggregation approaches being a suitable modelling strategy particularly with sparse data on the local population. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0277-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5217317/ /pubmed/28056835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0277-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Martin, Glen P.
Mamas, Mamas A.
Peek, Niels
Buchan, Iain
Sperrin, Matthew
Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
title Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
title_full Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
title_fullStr Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
title_full_unstemmed Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
title_short Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
title_sort clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217317/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28056835
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0277-1
work_keys_str_mv AT martinglenp clinicalpredictionindefinedpopulationsasimulationstudyinvestigatingwhenandhowtoaggregateexistingmodels
AT mamasmamasa clinicalpredictionindefinedpopulationsasimulationstudyinvestigatingwhenandhowtoaggregateexistingmodels
AT peekniels clinicalpredictionindefinedpopulationsasimulationstudyinvestigatingwhenandhowtoaggregateexistingmodels
AT buchaniain clinicalpredictionindefinedpopulationsasimulationstudyinvestigatingwhenandhowtoaggregateexistingmodels
AT sperrinmatthew clinicalpredictionindefinedpopulationsasimulationstudyinvestigatingwhenandhowtoaggregateexistingmodels