Literature DB >> 33430778

Relaxing the assumption of constant transition rates in a multi-state model in hospital epidemiology.

Micki Hill1, Paul C Lambert2,3, Michael J Crowther2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multi-state models are being increasingly used to capture complex disease pathways. The convenient formula of the exponential multi-state model can facilitate a quick and accessible understanding of the data. However, assuming time constant transition rates is not always plausible. On the other hand, obtaining predictions from a fitted model with time-dependent transitions can be challenging. One proposed solution is to utilise a general simulation algorithm to calculate predictions from a fitted multi-state model.
METHODS: Predictions obtained from an exponential multi-state model were compared to those obtained from two different parametric models and to non-parametric Aalen-Johansen estimates. The first comparative approach fitted a multi-state model with transition-specific distributions, chosen separately based on the Akaike Information Criterion. The second approach was a Royston-Parmar multi-state model with 4 degrees of freedom, which was chosen as a reference model flexible enough to capture complex hazard shapes. All quantities were obtained analytically for the exponential and Aalen-Johansen approaches. The transition rates for the two comparative approaches were also obtained analytically, while all other quantities were obtained from the fitted models via a general simulation algorithm. Metrics investigated were: transition probabilities, attributable mortality (AM), population attributable fraction (PAF) and expected length of stay. This work was performed on previously analysed hospital acquired infection (HAI) data. By definition, a HAI takes three days to develop and therefore selected metrics were also predicted from time 3 (delayed entry).
RESULTS: Despite clear deviations from the constant transition rates assumption, the empirical estimates of the transition probabilities were approximated reasonably well by the exponential model. However, functions of the transition probabilities, e.g. AM and PAF, were not well approximated and the comparative models offered considerable improvements for these metrics. They also provided consistent predictions with the empirical estimates in the case of delayed entry time, unlike the exponential model.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that methods and software are readily available for obtaining predictions from multi-state models that do not assume constant transition rates. The multistate package in Stata facilitates a range of predictions with confidence intervals, which can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the data. User-friendly code is provided.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Competing risks; Expected length of stay; Markov processes; Multi-state models; Software; Survival analysis; Transition probabilities

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33430778      PMCID: PMC7798316          DOI: 10.1186/s12874-020-01192-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol        ISSN: 1471-2288            Impact factor:   4.615


  22 in total

1.  Regression models for expected length of stay.

Authors:  Mia Klinten Grand; Hein Putter
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Reduced-rank proportional hazards regression and simulation-based prediction for multi-state models.

Authors:  Marta Fiocco; Hein Putter; Hans C van Houwelingen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Flexible nonhomogeneous markov models for panel observed data.

Authors:  Andrew C Titman
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Use of multistate models to assess prolongation of intensive care unit stay due to nosocomial infection.

Authors:  J Beyersmann; P Gastmeier; H Grundmann; S Bärwolff; C Geffers; M Behnke; H Rüden; M Schumacher
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2006-04-20       Impact factor: 3.254

5.  Estimation and prediction in a multi-state model for breast cancer.

Authors:  Hein Putter; Jos van der Hage; Geertruida H de Bock; Rachid Elgalta; Cornelis J H van de Velde
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.207

6.  Application of multi-state models in cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Jennifer G Le-Rademacher; Ryan A Peterson; Terry M Therneau; Ben L Sanford; Richard M Stone; Sumithra J Mandrekar
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 2.486

7.  Estimating transition probability of different states of type 2 diabetes and its associated factors using Markov model.

Authors:  Mahsa Nazari; Saeed Hashemi Nazari; Farid Zayeri; Mehrzad Gholampour Dehaki; Alireza Akbarzadeh Baghban
Journal:  Prim Care Diabetes       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 2.459

8.  Attributable mortality due to nosocomial infections. A simple and useful application of multistate models.

Authors:  M Schumacher; M Wangler; M Wolkewitz; J Beyersmann
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.176

9.  Advantages of a multi-state approach in surgical research: how intermediate events and risk factor profile affect the prognosis of a patient with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Authors:  G Manzini; T J Ettrich; M Kremer; M Kornmann; D Henne-Bruns; D A Eikema; P Schlattmann; L C de Wreede
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Basic parametric analysis for a multi-state model in hospital epidemiology.

Authors:  Maja von Cube; Martin Schumacher; Martin Wolkewitz
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.