Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34560604›Full record

ArticleComputer methods and programs in biomedicine2021

A standardized analytics pipeline for reliable and rapid development and validation of prediction models using observational health data.

Sara Khalid, Cynthia Yang, Clair Blacketer, Talita Duarte-Salles, Sergio Fernández-Bertolín, Chungsoo Kim, Rae Woong Park, Jimyung Park, Martijn J Schuemie, Anthony G Sena and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Use of unstructured text in prognostic clinical prediction models: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Comparing penalization methods for linear models on large observational health data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Machine Learning and Real-World Data to Predict Lung Cancer Risk in Routine Care.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

14 authors.

Sara KhalidBotnar Research Centre, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Cynthia YangDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Clair BlacketerObservational Health Data Analytics, Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, NJ, USA.
Talita Duarte-SallesFundació Institut Universitari per a la recerca a ľAtenció Primària de Salut Jordi Gol i Gurina (IDIAPJGol), Barcelona, Spain.
Sergio Fernández-BertolínFundació Institut Universitari per a la recerca a ľAtenció Primària de Salut Jordi Gol i Gurina (IDIAPJGol), Barcelona, Spain.
Chungsoo KimDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Ajou University Graduate School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea.
Rae Woong ParkDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Ajou University Graduate School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea.
Jimyung ParkDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Ajou University Graduate School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea.
Martijn J SchuemieObservational Health Data Analytics, Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, NJ, USA.
Anthony G SenaDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Observational Health Data Analytics, Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, NJ, USA.
Marc A SuchardDepartments of Biomathematics, University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Seng Chan YouDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Republic of Korea.
Peter R RijnbeekDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Jenna M RepsObservational Health Data Analytics, Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, NJ, USA. Electronic address: jreps@its.jnj.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveAs a response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, several prediction models in the existing literature were rapidly developed, with the aim of providing evidence-based guidance. However, none of these COVID-19 prediction models have been found to be reliable. Models are commonly assessed to have a risk of bias, often due to insufficient reporting, use of non-representative data, and lack of large-scale external validation. In this paper, we present the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) analytics pipeline for patient-level prediction modeling as a standardized approach for rapid yet reliable development and validation of prediction models. We demonstrate how our analytics pipeline and open-source software tools can be used to answer important prediction questions while limiting potential causes of bias (e.g., by validating phenotypes, specifying the target population, performing large-scale external validation, and publicly providing all analytical source code).

methodsWe show step-by-step how to implement the analytics pipeline for the question: 'In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, what is the risk of death 0 to 30 days after hospitalization?'. We develop models using six different machine learning methods in a USA claims database containing over 20,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and externally validate the models using data containing over 45,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations from South Korea, Spain, and the USA.

resultsOur open-source software tools enabled us to efficiently go end-to-end from problem design to reliable Model Development and evaluation. When predicting death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, AdaBoost, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and decision tree yielded similar or lower internal and external validation discrimination performance compared to L1-regularized logistic regression, whereas the MLP neural network consistently resulted in lower discrimination. L1-regularized logistic regression models were well calibrated.

conclusionOur results show that following the OHDSI analytics pipeline for patient-level prediction modelling can enable the rapid development towards reliable prediction models. The OHDSI software tools and pipeline are open source and available to researchers from all around the world.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsHumansLogistic ModelsMachine LearningSARS-CoV-2COVID-19Data harmonizationData quality controlDistributed data networkMachine learningRisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID34560604
PMCPMC8420135

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.