ReviewDiagnostic and prognostic research2026
Scoping review of methodology for aiding generalisability and transportability of clinical prediction models.
Review in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGeneralisability and transportability of clinical prediction models (CPMs) refer to their ability to maintain predictive performance when applied to new populations. While CPMs may show good generalisability or transportability to a specific new population, it is rare for a CPM to be developed using methods that prioritise good generalisability or transportability. There is an emerging literature of such techniques; therefore, this scoping review aims to summarise the main methodological approaches, assumptions, advantages, disadvantages and future development of methodology aiding the generalisability and transportability of CPMs.
methodsRelevant articles were systematically searched from MEDLINE, Embase, medRxiv, arxiv databases until August 2023 using a predefined set of search terms. Extracted information included methodology description, assumptions, applied examples, advantages and disadvantages.
resultsThe searches found 1,761 articles; 172 were retained for full text screening; 18 were finally included. We categorised the methodologies based on whether they are data-driven or knowledge-driven, and whether they are generalisable or transportable to specific target population. Data-driven approaches range from data augmentation to ensemble methods and density ratio weighting, while knowledge-driven strategies rely on causal methodology.
conclusionsFuture research could focus on comparing these methodologies across simulated and real datasets to identify their strengths and weaknesses in broad applications, as well as synthesising these approaches for enhancing their practical usefulness.
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.