Literature DB >> 23809117

Diagnostic and prognostic prediction models.

J M T Hendriksen1, G J Geersing, K G M Moons, J A H de Groot.   

Abstract

Risk prediction models can be used to estimate the probability of either having (diagnostic model) or developing a particular disease or outcome (prognostic model). In clinical practice, these models are used to inform patients and guide therapeutic management. Examples from the field of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) include the Wells rule for patients suspected of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and more recently prediction rules to estimate the risk of recurrence after a first episode of unprovoked VTE. In this paper, the three phases that are recommended before a prediction model may be used in daily practice are described: development, validation, and impact assessment. In the development phase, the focus is on model development commonly using a multivariable logistic (diagnostic) or survival (prognostic) regression analysis. The performance of the developed model is expressed by discrimination, calibration and (re-) classification. In the validation phase, the developed model is tested in a new set of patients using these same performance measures. This is important, as model performance is commonly poorer in a new set of patients, e.g. due to case-mix or domain differences. Finally, in the impact phase the ability of a prediction model to actually guide patient management is evaluated. Whereas in the development and validation phase single cohort designs are preferred, this last phase asks for comparative designs, ideally randomized designs; therapeutic management and outcomes after using the prediction model is compared to a control group not using the model (e.g. usual care).
© 2013 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  D-dimer; clinical prediction rule; probability; risk assessment; venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23809117     DOI: 10.1111/jth.12262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 1538-7836            Impact factor:   5.824


  55 in total

1.  Candidate Predictors of Health-Related Quality of Life of Colorectal Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Martijn J L Bours; Bernadette W A van der Linden; Renate M Winkels; Fränzel J van Duijnhoven; Floortje Mols; Eline H van Roekel; Ellen Kampman; Sandra Beijer; Matty P Weijenberg
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2016-02-24

Review 2.  Biomarkers of risk to develop lung cancer in the new screening era.

Authors:  Thomas Atwater; Pierre P Massion
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-04

Review 3.  Evidence-based statistical analysis and methods in biomedical research (SAMBR) checklists according to design features.

Authors:  Alok Kumar Dwivedi; Rakesh Shukla
Journal:  Cancer Rep (Hoboken)       Date:  2019-08-22

4.  Declining Long-term Risk of Adverse Events after First-time Community-presenting Venous Thromboembolism: The Population-based Worcester VTE Study (1999 to 2009).

Authors:  W Huang; R J Goldberg; A T Cohen; F A Anderson; C I Kiefe; J M Gore; F A Spencer
Journal:  Thromb Res       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 3.944

Review 5.  Developing prediction models for clinical use using logistic regression: an overview.

Authors:  Maren E Shipe; Stephen A Deppen; Farhood Farjah; Eric L Grogan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Comparison of six outcome prediction models in an adult burn population in a developing country.

Authors:  S H Salehi; K As'adi; A Abbaszadeh-Kasbi; M S Isfeedvajani; N Khodaei
Journal:  Ann Burns Fire Disasters       Date:  2017-03-31

7.  Validation of the Aldosteronoma Resolution Score Within Current Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Wessel M C M Vorselaars; Dirk-Jan van Beek; Emily L Postma; Wilko Spiering; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Gerlof D Valk; Menno R Vriens
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Screening strategies to identify sepsis in the prehospital setting: a validation study.

Authors:  Daniel J Lane; Hannah Wunsch; Refik Saskin; Sheldon Cheskes; Steve Lin; Laurie J Morrison; Damon C Scales
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2020-03-09       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  External validation of the SOX-PTS score in a prospective multicenter trial of patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Anat Rabinovich; Chu-Shu Gu; Suresh Vedantham; Clive Kearon; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Heather L Gornik; Susan R Kahn
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 5.824

10.  Optimizing the G8 Screening Tool for Older Patients With Cancer: Diagnostic Performance and Validation of a Six-Item Version.

Authors:  Claudia Martinez-Tapia; Florence Canoui-Poitrine; Sylvie Bastuji-Garin; Pierre Soubeyran; Simone Mathoulin-Pelissier; Christophe Tournigand; Elena Paillaud; Marie Laurent; Etienne Audureau
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2016-01-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.