Cargando…
A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models
There is growing interest in developing clinical prediction models (CPMs) to aid local healthcare decision‐making. Frequently, these CPMs are developed in isolation across different populations, with repetitive de novo derivation a common modelling strategy. However, this fails to utilise all availa...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873448/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29250812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.7586 |
_version_ | 1783310040777621504 |
---|---|
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 | There is growing interest in developing clinical prediction models (CPMs) to aid local healthcare decision‐making. Frequently, these CPMs are developed in isolation across different populations, with repetitive de novo derivation a common modelling strategy. However, this fails to utilise all available information and does not respond to changes in health processes through time and space. Alternatively, model updating techniques have previously been proposed that adjust an existing CPM to suit the new population, but these techniques are restricted to a single model. Therefore, we aimed to develop a generalised method for updating and aggregating multiple CPMs. The proposed “hybrid method” re‐calibrates multiple CPMs using stacked regression while concurrently revising specific covariates using individual participant data (IPD) under a penalised likelihood. The performance of the hybrid method was compared with existing methods in a clinical example of mortality risk prediction after transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and in 2 simulation studies. The simulation studies explored the effect of sample size and between‐population‐heterogeneity on the method, with each representing a situation of having multiple distinct CPMs and 1 set of IPD. When the sample size of the IPD was small, stacked regression and the hybrid method had comparable but highest performance across modelling methods. Conversely, in large IPD samples, development of a new model and the hybrid method gave the highest performance. Hence, the proposed strategy can inform the choice between utilising existing CPMs or developing a model de novo, thereby incorporating IPD, existing research, and prior (clinical) knowledge into the modelling strategy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5873448 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58734482018-03-31 A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models Martin, Glen P. Mamas, Mamas A. Peek, Niels Buchan, Iain Sperrin, Matthew Stat Med Research Articles There is growing interest in developing clinical prediction models (CPMs) to aid local healthcare decision‐making. Frequently, these CPMs are developed in isolation across different populations, with repetitive de novo derivation a common modelling strategy. However, this fails to utilise all available information and does not respond to changes in health processes through time and space. Alternatively, model updating techniques have previously been proposed that adjust an existing CPM to suit the new population, but these techniques are restricted to a single model. Therefore, we aimed to develop a generalised method for updating and aggregating multiple CPMs. The proposed “hybrid method” re‐calibrates multiple CPMs using stacked regression while concurrently revising specific covariates using individual participant data (IPD) under a penalised likelihood. The performance of the hybrid method was compared with existing methods in a clinical example of mortality risk prediction after transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and in 2 simulation studies. The simulation studies explored the effect of sample size and between‐population‐heterogeneity on the method, with each representing a situation of having multiple distinct CPMs and 1 set of IPD. When the sample size of the IPD was small, stacked regression and the hybrid method had comparable but highest performance across modelling methods. Conversely, in large IPD samples, development of a new model and the hybrid method gave the highest performance. Hence, the proposed strategy can inform the choice between utilising existing CPMs or developing a model de novo, thereby incorporating IPD, existing research, and prior (clinical) knowledge into the modelling strategy. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-12-18 2018-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5873448/ /pubmed/29250812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.7586 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Martin, Glen P. Mamas, Mamas A. Peek, Niels Buchan, Iain Sperrin, Matthew A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
title | A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
title_full | A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
title_fullStr | A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
title_full_unstemmed | A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
title_short | A multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
title_sort | multiple‐model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873448/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29250812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.7586 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martinglenp amultiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT mamasmamasa amultiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT peekniels amultiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT buchaniain amultiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT sperrinmatthew amultiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT martinglenp multiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT mamasmamasa multiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT peekniels multiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT buchaniain multiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels AT sperrinmatthew multiplemodelgeneralisationofupdatingclinicalpredictionmodels |