ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2024
Subgroup identification-based model selection to improve the predictive performance of individualized dosing.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine Learning-Based Model Selection and Averaging Outperform Single-Model Approaches for a Priori Vancomycin Precision Dosing.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Subgroup-based model selection to improve the prediction of vancomycin concentrations.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Currently, model-informed precision dosing uses one population pharmacokinetic model that best fits the target population. We aimed to develop a subgroup identification-based model selection approach to improve the predictive performance of individualized dosing, using vancomycin in neonates/infants as a test case. Data from neonates/infants with at least one vancomycin concentration was randomly divided into training and test dataset. Population predictions from published vancomycin population pharmacokinetic models were calculated. The single best-performing model based on various performance metrics, including median absolute percentage error (APE) and percentage of predictions within 20% (P20) or 60% (P60) of measurement, were determined. Clustering based on median APEs or clinical and demographic characteristics and model selection by genetic algorithm was used to group neonates/infants according to their best-performing model. Subsequently, classification trees to predict the best-performing model using clinical and demographic characteristics were developed. A total of 208 vancomycin treatment episodes in training and 88 in test dataset was included. Of 30 identified models from the literature, the single best-performing model for training dataset had P20 26.2-42.6% in test dataset. The best-performing clustering approach based on median APEs or clinical and demographic characteristics and model selection by genetic algorithm had P20 44.1-45.5% in test dataset, whereas P60 was comparable. Our proof-of-concept study shows that the prediction of the best-performing model for each patient according to the proposed model selection approaches has the potential to improve the predictive performance of model-informed precision dosing compared with the single best-performing model approach.
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.