Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40361167›Full record

ArticleBioData mining2025

Joint models in big data: simulation-based guidelines for required data quality in longitudinal electronic health records.

Berit Hunsdieck, Christian Bender, Katja Ickstadt, Johanna Mielke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioData mining, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Berit HunsdieckComputational Biology, Bayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany. berit.hunsdieck@bayer.com.
Christian Bender *Computational Biology, Bayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany.
Katja Ickstadt *Department of Statistics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Johanna Mielke *Computational Biology, Bayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past decade an increase in usage of electronic health data (EHR) by office-based physicians and hospitals has been reported. However, these data types come with challenge regarding completeness and data quality and it is, especially for more complex models, unclear how these characteristics influence the performance.

methodsIn this paper, we focus on joint models which combines longitudinal modelling with survival modelling to incorporate all available information. The aim of this paper is to establish simulation-based guidelines for the necessary quality of longitudinal EHR data so that joint models perform better than cox models. We conducted an extensive simulation study by systematically and transparently varying different characteristics of data quality, e.g., measurement frequency, noise, and heterogeneity between patients. We apply the joint models and evaluate their performance relative to traditional Cox survival modelling techniques.

resultsKey findings suggest that biomarker changes before disease onset must be consistent within similar patient groups. With increasing noise and a higher measurement density, the joint model surpasses the traditional Cox regression model in terms of model performance. We illustrate the usefulness and limitations of the guidelines with two real-world examples, namely the influence of serum bilirubin on primary biliary liver cirrhosis and the influence of the estimated glomerular filtration rate on chronic kidney disease.

Indexed as

Chronic kidney diseaseJoint modellingLongitudinal data applicationPrimary care dataSimulation study

Identifiers

PMID40361167
PMCPMC12070788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.