Loading…
Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature
Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To m...
Saved in:
Published in: | Diagnostic and prognostic research 2019-08, Vol.3 (1), p.16-16, Article 16 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73 |
container_end_page | 16 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 16 |
container_title | Diagnostic and prognostic research |
container_volume | 3 |
creator | Cowley, Laura E Farewell, Daniel M Maguire, Sabine Kemp, Alison M |
description | Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s41512-019-0060-y |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_4d6425c1aa694b7aa90c258f6507b7aa</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_4d6425c1aa694b7aa90c258f6507b7aa</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2546763352</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkktv1DAUhSMEotXQH8AGRWLDJuC3YxZIqOJRqYgNrK0b-2YmI0882MlU8-9xZkrVsrJ97zmf7OtTVa8peU9pqz5kQSVlDaGmIUSR5visumTc6EZLxp8_2l9UVzlvCSGMcmOofFldcCoU56q9rKYfOG2ijyGuBwehzhOMHpLPdR9TPW2w9njAEPc7HKe69Go8QJhhGuJYx752YRhPxn1CP7hTOc0B88ca6oSHAe8W2QIKw4QJpjnhq-pFDyHj1f26qn5__fLr-ntz-_PbzfXn28YJwY9NB84YYQDQS-pVJzqhNeqeAPMcjBbCqB7bDrhUXc_AdEYja4EL3rei03xV3Zy5PsLW7tOwg3S0EQZ7KsS0tpCmwQW0wivBpKMAyhQrgCGOybZXkujlWFifzqz93O3QuzKOBOEJ9GlnHDZ2HQ9WaSKUEgXw7h6Q4p8Z82R3Q3YYAowY52wZa5kkLWeySN_-J93GOY1lVJZJoXT5u_Kvq4qeVS7FnBP2D5ehxC4RseeI2BIRu0TEHovnzeNXPDj-BYL_BTDZucc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2546763352</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Cowley, Laura E ; Farewell, Daniel M ; Maguire, Sabine ; Kemp, Alison M</creator><creatorcontrib>Cowley, Laura E ; Farewell, Daniel M ; Maguire, Sabine ; Kemp, Alison M</creatorcontrib><description>Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2397-7523</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2397-7523</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s41512-019-0060-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31463368</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central</publisher><subject>Clinical prediction rule ; Decision making ; Impact analysis ; Impact studies ; Model development ; Model validation ; Patients ; Prediction model ; Probability ; Qualitative research ; Review ; Risk model</subject><ispartof>Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2019-08, Vol.3 (1), p.16-16, Article 16</ispartof><rights>2019. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. 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.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7757-4219</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2546763352/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2546763352?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31463368$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cowley, Laura E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farewell, Daniel M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maguire, Sabine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemp, Alison M</creatorcontrib><title>Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature</title><title>Diagnostic and prognostic research</title><addtitle>Diagn Progn Res</addtitle><description>Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.</description><subject>Clinical prediction rule</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Impact studies</subject><subject>Model development</subject><subject>Model validation</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prediction model</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Risk model</subject><issn>2397-7523</issn><issn>2397-7523</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkktv1DAUhSMEotXQH8AGRWLDJuC3YxZIqOJRqYgNrK0b-2YmI0882MlU8-9xZkrVsrJ97zmf7OtTVa8peU9pqz5kQSVlDaGmIUSR5visumTc6EZLxp8_2l9UVzlvCSGMcmOofFldcCoU56q9rKYfOG2ijyGuBwehzhOMHpLPdR9TPW2w9njAEPc7HKe69Go8QJhhGuJYx752YRhPxn1CP7hTOc0B88ca6oSHAe8W2QIKw4QJpjnhq-pFDyHj1f26qn5__fLr-ntz-_PbzfXn28YJwY9NB84YYQDQS-pVJzqhNeqeAPMcjBbCqB7bDrhUXc_AdEYja4EL3rei03xV3Zy5PsLW7tOwg3S0EQZ7KsS0tpCmwQW0wivBpKMAyhQrgCGOybZXkujlWFifzqz93O3QuzKOBOEJ9GlnHDZ2HQ9WaSKUEgXw7h6Q4p8Z82R3Q3YYAowY52wZa5kkLWeySN_-J93GOY1lVJZJoXT5u_Kvq4qeVS7FnBP2D5ehxC4RseeI2BIRu0TEHovnzeNXPDj-BYL_BTDZucc</recordid><startdate>20190822</startdate><enddate>20190822</enddate><creator>Cowley, Laura E</creator><creator>Farewell, Daniel M</creator><creator>Maguire, Sabine</creator><creator>Kemp, Alison M</creator><general>BioMed Central</general><general>BMC</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7757-4219</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190822</creationdate><title>Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature</title><author>Cowley, Laura E ; Farewell, Daniel M ; Maguire, Sabine ; Kemp, Alison M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Clinical prediction rule</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Impact studies</topic><topic>Model development</topic><topic>Model validation</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prediction model</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Risk model</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cowley, Laura E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farewell, Daniel M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maguire, Sabine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemp, Alison M</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Diagnostic and prognostic research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cowley, Laura E</au><au>Farewell, Daniel M</au><au>Maguire, Sabine</au><au>Kemp, Alison M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature</atitle><jtitle>Diagnostic and prognostic research</jtitle><addtitle>Diagn Progn Res</addtitle><date>2019-08-22</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>3</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>16</spage><epage>16</epage><pages>16-16</pages><artnum>16</artnum><issn>2397-7523</issn><eissn>2397-7523</eissn><abstract>Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central</pub><pmid>31463368</pmid><doi>10.1186/s41512-019-0060-y</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7757-4219</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2397-7523 |
ispartof | Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2019-08, Vol.3 (1), p.16-16, Article 16 |
issn | 2397-7523 2397-7523 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_4d6425c1aa694b7aa90c258f6507b7aa |
source | Publicly Available Content Database; PubMed Central |
subjects | Clinical prediction rule Decision making Impact analysis Impact studies Model development Model validation Patients Prediction model Probability Qualitative research Review Risk model |
title | Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T01%3A26%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Methodological%20standards%20for%20the%20development%20and%20evaluation%20of%20clinical%20prediction%20rules:%20a%20review%20of%20the%20literature&rft.jtitle=Diagnostic%20and%20prognostic%20research&rft.au=Cowley,%20Laura%20E&rft.date=2019-08-22&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=16&rft.epage=16&rft.pages=16-16&rft.artnum=16&rft.issn=2397-7523&rft.eissn=2397-7523&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s41512-019-0060-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2546763352%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c443y-bac9949aaed51d6b4b477e7f0a2d3a974496fe8ba356bf2a9b97e28a343f84b73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2546763352&rft_id=info:pmid/31463368&rfr_iscdi=true |