Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29968184›Full record

ArticleThe AAPS journal2018

Model-Based Residual Post-Processing for Residual Model Identification.

Moustafa M A Ibrahim, Rikard Nordgren, Maria C Kjellsson, Mats O Karlsson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The AAPS journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A fully automatic tool for development of population pharmacokinetic models.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation of covariate effects in item response theory models.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Moustafa M A IbrahimDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Rikard NordgrenDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Maria C KjellssonDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mats O KarlssonDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. mats.karlsson@farmbio.uu.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate if model-based post-processing of common diagnostics can be used as a diagnostic tool to quantitatively identify model misspecifications and rectifying actions. The main investigated diagnostic is conditional weighted residuals (CWRES). We have selected to showcase this principle with residual unexplained variability (RUV) models, where the new diagnostic tool is used to scan extended RUV models and assess in a fast and robust way whether, and what, extensions are expected to provide a superior description of data. The extended RUV models evaluated were autocorrelated errors, dynamic transform both sides, inter-individual variability on RUV, power error model, t-distributed errors, and time-varying error magnitude. The agreement in improvement in goodness-of-fit between implementing these extended RUV models on the original model and implementing these extended RUV models on CWRES was evaluated in real and simulated data examples. Real data exercise was applied to three other diagnostics: conditional weighted residuals with interaction (CWRESI), individual weighted residuals (IWRES), and normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE). CWRES modeling typically predicted (i) the nature of model misspecifications, (ii) the magnitude of the expected improvement in fit in terms of difference in objective function value (ΔOFV), and (iii) the parameter estimates associated with the model extension. Alternative metrics (CWRESI, IWRES, and NPDE) also provided valuable information, but with a lower predictive performance of ΔOFV compared to CWRES. This method is a fast and easily automated diagnostic tool for RUV model development/evaluation process; it is already implemented in the software package PsN.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalPharmacokineticsToxicokineticsComputer SimulationDrug DevelopmentDrug MonitoringHumansNonlinear DynamicsReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSoftwareconditional weighted residualsdiagnosticsmodel evaluationnonlinear mixed effects modelsresidual error model

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.