Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42894315›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

Calibrating Machine Learning Approaches for Probability Estimation Without Calibration Data.

Eleonora Di Carluccio, Georgios Koliopanos, Francisco M Ojeda, Christian Weimar, Andreas Ziegler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

5 authors.

Eleonora Di CarluccioCardio-CARE, Medizincampus Davos, Davos, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5618-1141
Georgios KoliopanosCardio-CARE, Medizincampus Davos, Davos, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0667-6178
Francisco M OjedaDepartment of Cardiology, University Heart and Vascular Center Hamburg, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Christian WeimarBDH-Klinik Elzach, Elzach, Germany.
Andreas ZieglerCardio-CARE, Medizincampus Davos, Davos, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8386-5397

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Statistical prediction models for binary outcomes are becoming increasingly popular. One significant challenge is calibrating these models to suit the characteristics of a target population that is structurally different from the original population. Calibration is especially challenging when there is no training data available from the target population. To address this problem, we propose a novel calibration method, SimCal, which uses synthetic data generated from the model development data in conjunction with marginal statistics from the calibration cohort. We show that expert judgment modeling (EJM) may be used for calibration if cross-sectional data from the target population are available comprising expert judgments about the potential outcome and the covariates. We describe three alternative calibration approaches when calibration data are lacking: similarity-binning averaging (SBA), adaptive calibration of predictions (ACP), and Elkan calibration. In a simulation study, we compare SBA, ACP, Elkan calibration, and SimCal. R code for applying these methods is provided from the re-analysis of data on coronary artery disease. We illustrate all 5 calibration approaches with a real data set for predicting functional outcome after stroke and all approaches but EJM in the re-analysis of the Cleveland Clinic data. None of the approaches performed convincingly well in all situations. SimCal performed well when model parameters were correctly specified. EJM failed on the stroke data. Further research is urgently required for calibration in the absence of calibration data.

Indexed as

Machine LearningModels, StatisticalCalibrationComputer SimulationCoronary Artery DiseaseCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPrediction AlgorithmsPredictive Learning ModelsProbabilityStrokeadaptive calibration of predictionsElkan calibrationexpert judgment modelingjudgmental bootstrapsimilarity binning averaging

Identifiers

PMID42894315
PMCPMC13678028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.