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...

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: 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