ArticleDiagnostic and prognostic research2021
Adaptive sample size determination for the development of clinical prediction models.
Article in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediction models for mortality in patients with sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- FuTURe Study (FUnctional Tricuspid Update Study of REcurrence)-Personalized Risk Stratification for Functional Tricuspid Regurgitation Recurrence After Mitral-Tricuspid Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Traditional statistics and artificial intelligence-based prognostic models for predicting type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2026Review
- A decomposition of Fisher's information to inform sample size for developing or updating fair and precise clinical prediction models - part 3: continuous outcomes.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2026Article
- Risk of bias in machine learning and statistical models to predict height or weight: a systematic review in fetal and paediatric medicine.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Review
- Analysis of influencing factors of parents' job stress of preschool children with mental retardation based on preference score matching.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Secondary Prevention of AFAIS: Deploying Traditional Regression, Machine Learning, and Deep Learning Models to Validate and Update CHA2DS2-VASc for 90-Day Recurrence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Gambling, suicide and mental health treatment utilisation in Wales: case-control, whole-population-based study.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Risk Factors and Development of a Predictive Model for In-Hospital Mortality in Hemodynamically Stable Older Adults with Urinary Tract Infection.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- A decomposition of Fisher's information to inform sample size for developing or updating fair and precise clinical prediction models for individual risk-part 1: binary outcomes.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Model for Predicting Coronary Heart Disease Risk: Development and Validation Using Insights From a Japanese Population-Based Study.JMIR cardio · 2025Article
- Clinical prediction models using machine learning in oncology: challenges and recommendations.BMJ oncology · 2025Review
- Latent profile analysis of depression and anxiety comorbidity in patients with acute ischemic stroke: a prospective study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Scalable de novo classification of antibiotic resistance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical prediction models and the multiverse of madness.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models developed or validated using clustered data (TRIPOD-Cluster): explanation and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Article
- Critical appraisal of artificial intelligence-based prediction models for cardiovascular disease.European heart journal · 2022Article
- Uncertainty and the Value of Information in Risk Prediction Modeling.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Article
- Guidelines and quality criteria for artificial intelligence-based prediction models in healthcare: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe suggest an adaptive sample size calculation method for developing clinical prediction models, in which model performance is monitored sequentially as new data comes in.
methodsWe illustrate the approach using data for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer (n = 5914, 33% event fraction) and obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD; n = 4888, 44% event fraction). We used logistic regression to develop a prediction model consisting only of a priori selected predictors and assumed linear relations for continuous predictors. We mimicked prospective patient recruitment by developing the model on 100 randomly selected patients, and we used bootstrapping to internally validate the model. We sequentially added 50 random new patients until we reached a sample size of 3000 and re-estimated model performance at each step. We examined the required sample size for satisfying the following stopping rule: obtaining a calibration slope ≥ 0.9 and optimism in the c-statistic (or AUC) < = 0.02 at two consecutive sample sizes. This procedure was repeated 500 times. We also investigated the impact of alternative modeling strategies: modeling nonlinear relations for continuous predictors and correcting for bias on the model estimates (Firth's correction).
resultsBetter discrimination was achieved in the ovarian cancer data (c-statistic 0.9 with 7 predictors) than in the CAD data (c-statistic 0.7 with 11 predictors). Adequate calibration and limited optimism in discrimination was achieved after a median of 450 patients (interquartile range 450-500) for the ovarian cancer data (22 events per parameter (EPP), 20-24) and 850 patients (750-900) for the CAD data (33 EPP, 30-35). A stricter criterion, requiring AUC optimism < = 0.01, was met with a median of 500 (23 EPP) and 1500 (59 EPP) patients, respectively. These sample sizes were much higher than the well-known 10 EPP rule of thumb and slightly higher than a recently published fixed sample size calculation method by Riley et al. Higher sample sizes were required when nonlinear relationships were modeled, and lower sample sizes when Firth's correction was used.
conclusionsAdaptive sample size determination can be a useful supplement to fixed a priori sample size calculations, because it allows to tailor the sample size to the specific prediction modeling context in a dynamic fashion.
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.