Literature DB >> 31718298

Effect of Variable Selection Strategy on the Performance of Prognostic Models When Using Multiple Imputation.

Peter C Austin1,2,3, Douglas S Lee1,2,4,5, Dennis T Ko1,2,3,4, Ian R White6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Variable selection is an important issue when developing prognostic models. Missing data occur frequently in clinical research. Multiple imputation is increasingly used to address the presence of missing data in clinical research. The effect of different variable selection strategies with multiply imputed data on the external performance of derived prognostic models has not been well examined. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We used backward variable selection with 9 different ways to handle multiply imputed data in a derivation sample to develop logistic regression models for predicting death within 1 year of hospitalization with an acute myocardial infarction. We assessed the prognostic accuracy of each derived model in a temporally distinct validation sample. The derivation and validation samples consisted of 11 524 patients hospitalized between 1999 and 2001 and 7889 patients hospitalized between 2004 and 2005, respectively. We considered 41 candidate predictor variables. Missing data occurred frequently, with only 13% of patients in the derivation sample and 31% of patients in the validation sample having complete data. Regardless of the significance level for variable selection, the prognostic model developed using only the complete cases in the derivation sample had substantially worse performance in the validation sample than did the models for which variables were selected using the multiply imputed versions of the derivation sample. The other 8 approaches to handling multiply imputed data resulted in prognostic models with performance similar to one another.
CONCLUSIONS: Ignoring missing data and using only subjects with complete data can result in the derivation of prognostic models with poor performance. Multiple imputation should be used to account for missing data when developing prognostic models.

Entities:  

Keywords:  death; hospitalization; incidence; myocardial infarction; probability

Year:  2019        PMID: 31718298     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.005927

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  4 in total

1.  Development and External Validation of a Mortality Prediction Model for Community-Dwelling Older Adults With Dementia.

Authors:  W James Deardorff; Deborah E Barnes; Sun Y Jeon; W John Boscardin; Kenneth M Langa; Kenneth E Covinsky; Susan L Mitchell; Elizabeth L Whitlock; Alexander K Smith; Sei J Lee
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 44.409

2.  Incidence, prognostic factors, and outcomes of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients: data from two prospective cohort studies.

Authors:  Ruben J Eck; Lisa Hulshof; Renske Wiersema; Chris H L Thio; Bart Hiemstra; Niels C Gritters van den Oever; Reinold O B Gans; Iwan C C van der Horst; Karina Meijer; Frederik Keus
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 9.097

3.  A simple pooling method for variable selection in multiply imputed datasets outperformed complex methods.

Authors:  A M Panken; M W Heymans
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 4.612

4.  Performance of a novel risk model for deep sternal wound infection after coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  Pedro de Barros E Silva; Marco Antonio Praça Oliveira; Marcelo Arruda Nakazone; Marcos Gradim Tiveron; Valquíria Pelliser Campagnucci; Bianca Maria Maglia Orlandi; Omar Asdrúbal Vilca Mejia; Jennifer Loría Sorio; Luiz Augusto Ferreira Lisboa; Jorge Zubelli; Sharon-Lise Normand; Fabio Biscegli Jatene
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 4.996

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.