22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Dynamic models to predict health outcomes: current status and methodological challenges

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Disease populations, clinical practice, and healthcare systems are constantly evolving. This can result in clinical prediction models quickly becoming outdated and less accurate over time. A potential solution is to develop ‘dynamic’ prediction models capable of retaining accuracy by evolving over time in response to observed changes. Our aim was to review the literature in this area to understand the current state-of-the-art in dynamic prediction modelling and identify unresolved methodological challenges.

          Methods

          MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were searched for papers which used or developed dynamic clinical prediction models. Information was extracted on methods for model updating, choice of update windows and decay factors and validation of models. We also extracted reported limitations of methods and recommendations for future research.

          Results

          We identified eleven papers that discussed seven dynamic clinical prediction modelling methods which split into three categories. The first category uses frequentist methods to update models in discrete steps, the second uses Bayesian methods for continuous updating and the third, based on varying coefficients, explicitly describes the relationship between predictors and outcome variable as a function of calendar time. These methods have been applied to a limited number of healthcare problems, and few empirical comparisons between them have been made.

          Conclusion

          Dynamic prediction models are not well established but they overcome one of the major issues with static clinical prediction models, calibration drift. However, there are challenges in choosing decay factors and in dealing with sudden changes. The validation of dynamic prediction models is still largely unexplored terrain.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Multimorbidity in older adults.

          M Salive (2013)
          Multimorbidity, the coexistence of 2 or more chronic conditions, has become prevalent among older adults as mortality rates have declined and the population has aged. We examined population-based administrative claims data indicating specific health service delivery to nearly 31 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries for 15 prevalent chronic conditions. A total of 67% had multimorbidity, which increased with age, from 50% for persons under age 65 years to 62% for those aged 65-74 years and 81.5% for those aged ≥85 years. A systematic review identified 16 other prevalence studies conducted in community samples that included older adults, with median prevalence of 63% and a mode of 67%. Prevalence differences between studies are probably due to methodological biases; no studies were comparable. Key methodological issues arise from elements of the case definition, including type and number of chronic conditions included, ascertainment methods, and source population. Standardized methods for measuring multimorbidity are needed to enable public health surveillance and prevention. Multimorbidity is associated with elevated risk of death, disability, poor functional status, poor quality of life, and adverse drug events. Additional research is needed to develop an understanding of causal pathways and to further develop and test potential clinical and population interventions targeting multimorbidity. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health 2013.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Assessing the generalizability of prognostic information.

            Physicians are often asked to make prognostic assessments but often worry that their assessments will prove inaccurate. Prognostic systems were developed to enhance the accuracy of such assessments. This paper describes an approach for evaluating prognostic systems based on the accuracy (calibration and discrimination) and generalizability (reproducibility and transportability) of the system's predictions. Reproducibility is the ability to produce accurate predictions among patients not included in the development of the system but from the same population. Transportability is the ability to produce accurate predictions among patients drawn from a different but plausibly related population. On the basis of the observation that the generalizability of a prognostic system is commonly limited to a single historical period, geographic location, methodologic approach, disease spectrum, or follow-up interval, we describe a working hierarchy of the cumulative generalizability of prognostic systems. This approach is illustrated in a structured review of the Dukes and Jass staging systems for colon and rectal cancer and applied to a young man with colon cancer. Because it treats the development of the system as a "black box" and evaluates only the performance of the predictions, the approach can be applied to any system that generates predicted probabilities. Although the Dukes and Jass staging systems are discrete, the approach can also be applied to systems that generate continuous predictions and, with some modification, to systems that predict over multiple time periods. Like any scientific hypothesis, the generalizability of a prognostic system is established by being tested and being found accurate across increasingly diverse settings. The more numerous and diverse the settings in which the system is tested and found accurate, the more likely it will generalize to an untested setting.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE)

              European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 16(1), 9-13
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                david.jenkins-5@manchester.ac.uk
                matthew.sperrin@manchester.ac.uk
                niels.peek@manchester.ac.uk
                Journal
                Diagn Progn Res
                Diagn Progn Res
                Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                2397-7523
                18 December 2018
                18 December 2018
                2018
                : 2
                : 23
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000000121662407, GRID grid.5379.8, Health e-Research Centre, Farr Institute, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, , University of Manchester, ; Manchester, UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000000121662407, GRID grid.5379.8, NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, , The University of Manchester, ; Manchester, UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000000121662407, GRID grid.5379.8, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, , University of Manchester, ; City Labs 1.0, Nelson Street, Manchester, M13 9NQ UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6687-3507
                Article
                45
                10.1186/s41512-018-0045-2
                6460710
                31093570
                292d5b6c-3a23-4717-9a8a-45ef7769c880
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 9 July 2018
                : 19 November 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                prediction models,calibration,dynamic models,validation
                prediction models, calibration, dynamic models, validation

                Comments

                Comment on this article