A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes

A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes

It is widely recommended that any developed—diagnostic or prognostic—prediction model is externally validated in terms of its predictive performance measured by calibration and discrimination. When multiple validations have been performed, a systematic review followed by a formal meta-analysis helps...

Volledige beschrijving

Bibliografische gegevens
Hoofdauteurs:	Debray, T, Damen, J, Riley, R, Snell, K, Reitsma, J, Hooft, L, Collins, G, Moons, K
Formaat:	Journal article
Taal:	English
Gepubliceerd in:	SAGE Publications 2018

Gelijkaardige items

Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: PART II ‐ binary and time‐to‐event outcomes
door: Riley, R, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2018)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models for individual prognosis or diagnosis: checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (TRIPOD-SRMA)
door: Snell, KIE, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2023)

A guide to systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factor studies
door: Riley, R, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2019)

External validation of clinical prediction models using big datasets from e-health records or IPD meta-analysis: opportunities and challenges
door: Riley, R, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2016)

Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a binary outcome
door: Riley, RD, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2021)

Sample size for binary logistic prediction models: Beyond events per variable criteria
door: Van Smeden, M, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2018)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models developed or validated using clustered data: TRIPOD-Cluster checklist
door: Debray, TPA, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2023)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models developed or validated using clustered data (TRIPOD-Cluster): explanation and elaboration
door: Debray, TPA, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2023)

Risk of bias assessments in individual participant data meta-analyses of test accuracy and prediction models: a review shows improvements are needed
door: Levis, B, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2023)

No rationale for 1 variable per 10 events criterion for binary logistic regression analysis.
door: van Smeden, M, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2016)

Performance of the Framingham risk models and pooled cohort equations for predicting 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
door: Johanna A. Damen, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2019-06-01)

Poor reporting of multivariable prediction model studies: towards a targeted implementation strategy of the TRIPOD statement
door: Heus, P, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2018)

Uniformity in measuring adherence to reporting guidelines: the example of TRIPOD for assessing completeness of reporting of prediction model studies
door: Heus, P, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2019)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models in journal and conference abstracts: TRIPOD for abstracts
door: Heus, P, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2020)

Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: Part I – Continuous outcomes
door: Riley, R, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2018)

Explicit inclusion of treatment in prognostic modelling was recommended in observational and randomised settings
door: Groenwold, R, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2016)

No rationale for 1 variable per 10 events criterion for binary logistic regression analysis
door: Maarten van Smeden, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2016-11-01)

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement.
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD statement
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement.
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2014)

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) : the TRIPOD statement
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) : the TRIPOD statement
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement.
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement.
door: Collins, G, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2015)

Calculating the sample size required for developing a clinical prediction model
door: Riley, RD, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2020)

Minimum sample size calculations for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a time-to-event outcome
door: Riley, RD, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2021)

PROBAST: A Tool to Assess Risk of Bias and Applicability of Prediction Model Studies: Explanation and Elaboration
door: Moons, K, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2019)

Completeness of reporting of clinical prediction models developed using supervised machine learning: a systematic review
door: Andaur Navarro, CL, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2022)

Risk of bias in studies on prediction models developed using supervised machine learning techniques: systematic review
door: Andaur Navarro, CL, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2021)

Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
door: Andaur Navarro, CL, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2020)

Systematic review finds "spin" practices and poor reporting standards in studies on machine learning-based prediction models
door: Andaur Navarro, CL, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2023)

Poor reporting of multivariable prediction model studies: towards a targeted implementation strategy of the TRIPOD statement
door: Pauline Heus, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2018-07-01)

Reporting of prognostic clinical prediction models based on machine learning methods in oncology needs to be improved
door: Dhiman, P, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2021)

External validation of clinical prediction models: simulation-based sample size calculations were more reliable than rules-of-thumb
door: Snell, KIE, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2021)

Calculating the power of a planned individual participant data meta‐analysis to examine prognostic factor effects for a binary outcome
door: Whittle, R, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2024)

Overinterpretation of findings in machine learning prediction model studies in oncology: a systematic review
door: Dhiman, P, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2023)

Calculating the power to examine treatment-covariate interactions when planning an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials with a binary outcome
door: Riley, RD, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2022)

Continual updating and monitoring of clinical prediction models: time for dynamic prediction systems?
door: Jenkins, DA, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2021)

Systematic review identifies the design and methodological conduct of studies on machine learning-based prediction models
door: Andaur Navarro, CL, et al.
Gepubliceerd in: (2022)