ArticleBMC medical research methodology2017
Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nonlinear association between glycemic markers and incident cardio‑renal‑metabolic multimorbidity: two decades of follow‑up in the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Personalized risk stratification in colorectal cancer via PIANOS system.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Development of a predictive model for 1-year postoperative recovery in patients with lumbar disk herniation based on deep learning and machine learning.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Continual updating and monitoring of clinical prediction models: time for dynamic prediction systems?Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2021Article
- Machine learning for the life-time risk prediction of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review.Brain communications · 2021Review
- Assessment of heterogeneity in an individual participant data meta-analysis of prediction models: An overview and illustration.Statistics in medicine · 2019Article
- The use of prognostic scores for causal inference with general treatment regimes.Statistics in medicine · 2019Article
- Evidence synthesis in prognosis research.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2019Article
- A multiple-model generalisation of updating clinical prediction models.Statistics in medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical prediction models (CPMs) are increasingly deployed to support healthcare decisions but they are derived inconsistently, in part due to limited data. An emerging alternative is to aggregate existing CPMs developed for similar settings and outcomes. This simulation study aimed to investigate the impact of between-population-heterogeneity and sample size on aggregating existing CPMs in a defined population, compared with developing a model de novo.
methodsSimulations were designed to mimic a scenario in which multiple CPMs for a binary outcome had been derived in distinct, heterogeneous populations, with potentially different predictors available in each. We then generated a new 'local' population and compared the performance of CPMs developed for this population by aggregation, using stacked regression, principal component analysis or partial least squares, with redevelopment from scratch using backwards selection and penalised regression.
resultsWhile redevelopment approaches resulted in models that were miscalibrated for local datasets of less than 500 observations, model aggregation methods were well calibrated across all simulation scenarios. When the size of local data was less than 1000 observations and between-population-heterogeneity was small, aggregating existing CPMs gave better discrimination and had the lowest mean square error in the predicted risks compared with deriving a new model. Conversely, given greater than 1000 observations and significant between-population-heterogeneity, then redevelopment outperformed the aggregation approaches. In all other scenarios, both aggregation and de novo derivation resulted in similar predictive performance.
conclusionThis study demonstrates a pragmatic approach to contextualising CPMs to defined populations. When aiming to develop models in defined populations, modellers should consider existing CPMs, with aggregation approaches being a suitable modelling strategy particularly with sparse data on the local population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.