Literature DB >> 27647815

Does ignoring clustering in multicenter data influence the performance of prediction models? A simulation study.

L Wynants1,2, Y Vergouwe3, S Van Huffel1,2, D Timmerman4, B Van Calster3,4.   

Abstract

Clinical risk prediction models are increasingly being developed and validated on multicenter datasets. In this article, we present a comprehensive framework for the evaluation of the predictive performance of prediction models at the center level and the population level, considering population-averaged predictions, center-specific predictions, and predictions assuming an average random center effect. We demonstrated in a simulation study that calibration slopes do not only deviate from one because of over- or underfitting of patterns in the development dataset, but also as a result of the choice of the model (standard versus mixed effects logistic regression), the type of predictions (marginal versus conditional versus assuming an average random effect), and the level of model validation (center versus population). In particular, when data is heavily clustered (ICC 20%), center-specific predictions offer the best predictive performance at the population level and the center level. We recommend that models should reflect the data structure, while the level of model validation should reflect the research question.

Keywords:  Mixed model; bias; calibration; clinical prediction model; discrimination; logistic regression; predictive performance

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27647815     DOI: 10.1177/0962280216668555

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  11 in total

1.  Risk of major postoperative complications in breast reconstructive surgery with and without an acellular dermal matrix: A development of a prognostic prediction model.

Authors:  N S Hillberg; J Hogenboom; J Hommes; S M J Van Kuijk; X H A Keuter; R R W J van der Hulst
Journal:  JPRAS Open       Date:  2022-05-12

2.  Assessment of an Updated Neonatal Research Network Extremely Preterm Birth Outcome Model in the Vermont Oxford Network.

Authors:  Matthew A Rysavy; Jeffrey D Horbar; Edward F Bell; Lei Li; Lucy T Greenberg; Jon E Tyson; Ravi M Patel; Waldemar A Carlo; Noelle E Younge; Charles E Green; Erika M Edwards; Susan R Hintz; Michele C Walsh; Jeffrey S Buzas; Abhik Das; Rosemary D Higgins
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 16.193

3.  Prevalence and Cumulative Risk of Familial Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Gordon S Huggins; Daniel D Kinnamon; Garrie J Haas; Elizabeth Jordan; Mark Hofmeyer; Evan Kransdorf; Gregory A Ewald; Alanna A Morris; Anjali Owens; Brian Lowes; Douglas Stoller; W H Wilson Tang; Sonia Garg; Barry H Trachtenberg; Palak Shah; Salpy V Pamboukian; Nancy K Sweitzer; Matthew T Wheeler; Jane E Wilcox; Stuart Katz; Stephen Pan; Javier Jimenez; Keith D Aaronson; Daniel P Fishbein; Frank Smart; Jessica Wang; Stephen S Gottlieb; Daniel P Judge; Charles K Moore; Jonathan O Mead; Hanyu Ni; Wylie Burke; Ray E Hershberger
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 157.335

4.  Designing risk prediction models for ambulatory no-shows across different specialties and clinics.

Authors:  Xiruo Ding; Ziad F Gellad; Chad Mather; Pamela Barth; Eric G Poon; Mark Newman; Benjamin A Goldstein
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 5.  Untapped potential of multicenter studies: a review of cardiovascular risk prediction models revealed inappropriate analyses and wide variation in reporting.

Authors:  L Wynants; D M Kent; D Timmerman; C M Lundquist; B Van Calster
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2019-02-22

6.  Risk prediction in multicentre studies when there is confounding by cluster or informative cluster size.

Authors:  Menelaos Pavlou; Gareth Ambler; Rumana Z Omar
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-07-04       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Modelling hospital outcome: problems with endogeneity.

Authors:  John L Moran; John D Santamaria; Graeme J Duke
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  Developing risk models for multicenter data using standard logistic regression produced suboptimal predictions: A simulation study.

Authors:  Nora Falconieri; Ben Van Calster; Dirk Timmerman; Laure Wynants
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 2.207

9.  Single-center versus multi-center data sets for molecular prognostic modeling: a simulation study.

Authors:  Daniel Samaga; Roman Hornung; Herbert Braselmann; Julia Hess; Horst Zitzelsberger; Claus Belka; Anne-Laure Boulesteix; Kristian Unger
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Assessment of heterogeneity in an individual participant data meta-analysis of prediction models: An overview and illustration.

Authors:  Ewout W Steyerberg; Daan Nieboer; Thomas P A Debray; Hans C van Houwelingen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.