Cargando…

Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to provide further insights into the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation over time. We focus on assessing the reporting of information necessary to enable external validation by other investigators. MATERIALS AND METHO...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Cynthia, Kors, Jan A, Ioannou, Solomon, John, Luis H, Markus, Aniek F, Rekkas, Alexandros, de Ridder, Maria A J, Seinen, Tom M, Williams, Ross D, Rijnbeek, Peter R
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9006694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35045179
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac002
_version_ 1784686717310074880
author Yang, Cynthia
Kors, Jan A
Ioannou, Solomon
John, Luis H
Markus, Aniek F
Rekkas, Alexandros
de Ridder, Maria A J
Seinen, Tom M
Williams, Ross D
Rijnbeek, Peter R
author_facet Yang, Cynthia
Kors, Jan A
Ioannou, Solomon
John, Luis H
Markus, Aniek F
Rekkas, Alexandros
de Ridder, Maria A J
Seinen, Tom M
Williams, Ross D
Rijnbeek, Peter R
author_sort Yang, Cynthia
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to provide further insights into the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation over time. We focus on assessing the reporting of information necessary to enable external validation by other investigators. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched Embase, Medline, Web-of-Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to identify studies that developed 1 or more multivariable prognostic prediction models using electronic health record (EHR) data published in the period 2009–2019. RESULTS: We identified 422 studies that developed a total of 579 clinical prediction models using EHR data. We observed a steep increase over the years in the number of developed models. The percentage of models externally validated in the same paper remained at around 10%. Throughout 2009–2019, for both the target population and the outcome definitions, code lists were provided for less than 20% of the models. For about half of the models that were developed using regression analysis, the final model was not completely presented. DISCUSSION: Overall, we observed limited improvement over time in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation. In particular, the prediction problem definition was often not clearly reported, and the final model was often not completely presented. CONCLUSION: Improvement in the reporting of information necessary to enable external validation by other investigators is still urgently needed to increase clinical adoption of developed models.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9006694
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90066942022-04-13 Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review Yang, Cynthia Kors, Jan A Ioannou, Solomon John, Luis H Markus, Aniek F Rekkas, Alexandros de Ridder, Maria A J Seinen, Tom M Williams, Ross D Rijnbeek, Peter R J Am Med Inform Assoc Reviews OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to provide further insights into the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation over time. We focus on assessing the reporting of information necessary to enable external validation by other investigators. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched Embase, Medline, Web-of-Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to identify studies that developed 1 or more multivariable prognostic prediction models using electronic health record (EHR) data published in the period 2009–2019. RESULTS: We identified 422 studies that developed a total of 579 clinical prediction models using EHR data. We observed a steep increase over the years in the number of developed models. The percentage of models externally validated in the same paper remained at around 10%. Throughout 2009–2019, for both the target population and the outcome definitions, code lists were provided for less than 20% of the models. For about half of the models that were developed using regression analysis, the final model was not completely presented. DISCUSSION: Overall, we observed limited improvement over time in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation. In particular, the prediction problem definition was often not clearly reported, and the final model was often not completely presented. CONCLUSION: Improvement in the reporting of information necessary to enable external validation by other investigators is still urgently needed to increase clinical adoption of developed models. Oxford University Press 2022-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9006694/ /pubmed/35045179 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac002 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Reviews
Yang, Cynthia
Kors, Jan A
Ioannou, Solomon
John, Luis H
Markus, Aniek F
Rekkas, Alexandros
de Ridder, Maria A J
Seinen, Tom M
Williams, Ross D
Rijnbeek, Peter R
Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
title Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
title_full Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
title_fullStr Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
title_short Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
title_sort trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9006694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35045179
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac002
work_keys_str_mv AT yangcynthia trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT korsjana trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT ioannousolomon trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT johnluish trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT markusaniekf trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT rekkasalexandros trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT deriddermariaaj trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT seinentomm trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT williamsrossd trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview
AT rijnbeekpeterr trendsintheconductandreportingofclinicalpredictionmodeldevelopmentandvalidationasystematicreview