Literature DB >> 20807737

External validity of risk models: Use of benchmark values to disentangle a case-mix effect from incorrect coefficients.

Yvonne Vergouwe1, Karel G M Moons, Ewout W Steyerberg.   

Abstract

Various performance measures related to calibration and discrimination are available for the assessment of risk models. When the validity of a risk model is assessed in a new population, estimates of the model's performance can be influenced in several ways. The regression coefficients can be incorrect, which indeed results in an invalid model. However, the distribution of patient characteristics (case mix) may also influence the performance of the model. Here the authors consider a number of typical situations that can be encountered in external validation studies. Theoretical relations between differences in development and validation samples and performance measures are studied by simulation. Benchmark values for the performance measures are proposed to disentangle a case-mix effect from incorrect regression coefficients, when interpreting the model's estimated performance in validation samples. The authors demonstrate the use of the benchmark values using data on traumatic brain injury obtained from the International Tirilazad Trial and the North American Tirilazad Trial (1991-1994).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20807737      PMCID: PMC2984249          DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwq223

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  30 in total

1.  Predictive value of statistical models.

Authors:  J C Van Houwelingen; S Le Cessie
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Validation techniques for logistic regression models.

Authors:  M E Miller; S L Hui; W M Tierney
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Construction, validation and updating of a prognostic model for kidney graft survival.

Authors:  H C Van Houwelingen; J Thorogood
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1995-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Explained variation for logistic regression.

Authors:  M Mittlböck; M Schemper
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 5.  A comparison of goodness-of-fit tests for the logistic regression model.

Authors:  D W Hosmer; T Hosmer; S Le Cessie; S Lemeshow
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1997-05-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories.

Authors:  P W Wilson; R B D'Agostino; D Levy; A M Belanger; H Silbershatz; W B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1998-05-12       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Evaluating the yield of medical tests.

Authors:  F E Harrell; R M Califf; D B Pryor; K L Lee; R A Rosati
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1982-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Regression models for prognostic prediction: advantages, problems, and suggested solutions.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Matchar; T A Reichert
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1985-10

9.  A multicenter trial on the efficacy of using tirilazad mesylate in cases of head injury.

Authors:  L F Marshall; A I Maas; S B Marshall; A Bricolo; M Fearnside; F Iannotti; M R Klauber; J Lagarrigue; R Lobato; L Persson; J D Pickard; J Piek; F Servadei; G N Wellis; G F Morris; E D Means; B Musch
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 5.115

Review 10.  Statistical aspects of prognostic factor studies in oncology.

Authors:  R Simon; D G Altman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  79 in total

1.  External validation of the KORA S4/F4 prediction models for the risk of developing type 2 diabetes in older adults: the PREVEND study.

Authors:  Ali Abbasi; Eva Corpeleijn; Linda M Peelen; Ron T Gansevoort; Paul E de Jong; Rijk O B Gans; Wolfgang Rathmann; Bernd Kowall; Christine Meisinger; Hans L Hillege; Ronald P Stolk; Gerjan Navis; Joline W J Beulens; Stephan J L Bakker
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Evaluating disease prediction models using a cohort whose covariate distribution differs from that of the target population.

Authors:  Scott Powers; Valerie McGuire; Leslie Bernstein; Alison J Canchola; Alice S Whittemore
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 3.021

3.  Predicting 14-day mortality after severe traumatic brain injury: application of the IMPACT models in the brain trauma foundation TBI-trac® New York State database.

Authors:  Bob Roozenbeek; Ya-Lin Chiu; Hester F Lingsma; Linda M Gerber; Ewout W Steyerberg; Jamshid Ghajar; Andrew I R Maas
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 5.269

4.  Generalizability of Dutch Prediction Models for Low Hemoglobin Deferral: A Study on External Validation and Updating in Swiss Whole Blood Donors.

Authors:  A Mireille Baart; Stefano Fontana; Anita Tschaggelar; Martijn W Heymans; Wim L A M de Kort
Journal:  Transfus Med Hemother       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 3.747

5.  Nonlinear modeling was applied thoughtfully for risk prediction: the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group.

Authors:  Daan Nieboer; Yvonne Vergouwe; Monique J Roobol; Donna P Ankerst; Michael W Kattan; Andrew J Vickers; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Pa Debray; Johanna Aag Damen; Richard D Riley; Kym Snell; Johannes B Reitsma; Lotty Hooft; Gary S Collins; Karel Gm Moons
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 3.021

7.  Predictive accuracy of the Liverpool Lung Project risk model for stratifying patients for computed tomography screening for lung cancer: a case-control and cohort validation study.

Authors:  Olaide Y Raji; Stephen W Duffy; Olorunshola F Agbaje; Stuart G Baker; David C Christiani; Adrian Cassidy; John K Field
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Geographic and temporal validity of prediction models: different approaches were useful to examine model performance.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; David van Klaveren; Yvonne Vergouwe; Daan Nieboer; Douglas S Lee; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  A new concordance measure for risk prediction models in external validation settings.

Authors:  David van Klaveren; Mithat Gönen; Ewout W Steyerberg; Yvonne Vergouwe
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Decision analysis and reinforcement learning in surgical decision-making.

Authors:  Tyler J Loftus; Amanda C Filiberto; Yanjun Li; Jeremy Balch; Allyson C Cook; Patrick J Tighe; Philip A Efron; Gilbert R Upchurch; Parisa Rashidi; Xiaolin Li; Azra Bihorac
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2020-06-13       Impact factor: 3.982

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.