ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Extensive benchmarking of a method that estimates external model performance from limited statistical characteristics.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Artificial Intelligence in Predicting Prostate Cancer Biochemical Recurrence: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Medical laboratory data-based models: opportunities, obstacles, and solutions.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predictive model performance may deteriorate when applied to data sources that were not used for training, thus, external validation is a key step in successful model deployment. As access to patient-level external data sources is typically limited, we recently proposed a method that estimates external model performance using only external summary statistics. Here, we benchmark the proposed method on multiple tasks using five large heterogeneous US data sources, where each, in turn, plays the role of an internal source and the remaining-external. Results showed accurate estimations for all metrics: 95th error percentiles for the area under the receiver operating characteristics (discrimination), calibration-in-the-large (calibration), Brier and scaled Brier scores (overall accuracy) of 0.03, 0.08, 0.0002, and 0.07, respectively. These results demonstrate the feasibility of estimating the transportability of prediction models using an internal cohort and external statistics. It may become an important accelerator of model deployment.
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.