Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42058677›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2026

Generative models and synthetic data in clinical prediction models: Promoting consistency, reproducibility, and transparency.

Anthony A Mangino, Taha Ahmed, Vincent L Sorrell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Anthony A ManginoDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kentucky, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2699-9989
Taha AhmedEmory University, USA.
Vincent L SorrellDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Kentucky, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Reproducibility, consistency, and transparency are essential to responsible and ethical scientific inquiry, though practices supporting these qualities are often neglected. However, in many cases data are confidential or otherwise unable to be shared publicly. This tutorial describes a method utilizing generative adversarial networks (GANs) to create synthetic data that are sufficiently similar to the original dataset in such cases where the source data cannot be shared or where the source data are too sparse as to internally validate results. Methods: Utilizing an exemplar study that aimed to create a clinical prediction model employing a novel echocardiographic measurement to differentiate between acute coronary syndrome and Takotsubo syndrome, we demonstrate the procedure of fitting a GAN and evaluating the resulting synthetic dataset against the results from the source dataset using conventional analytic methodologies. Further, we include relevant R code and output from this process to aid in implementation. Results: The procedure we detail yielded a synthetic dataset that was largely similar to the source data used in univariate descriptive statistics, significance testing comparing variables across datasets, data visualizations, and yielded largely comparable secondary model fit and accuracy metrics. Conclusions: We demonstrated that through the implementation of a well-tuned GAN, synthetic data can be generated as a sufficiently faithful simulacrum of the source data for the purposes of internal validation, transparency of method, and reproducibility of analytic results.

Indexed as

clinical prediction modelsconsistencyGenerative modelingreproducibilitytransparency

Identifiers

PMID42058677
PMCPMC13122389

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.