ArticleJMIR medical informatics2024
Targeted Development and Validation of Clinical Prediction Models in Secondary Care Settings: Opportunities and Challenges for Electronic Health Record Data.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: Before deploying a clinical prediction model (CPM) in clinical practice, its performance needs to be demonstrated in the population of intended use. This is also called "targeted validation." Many CPMs developed in tertiary settings may be most useful in secondary care, where the patient case mix is broad and practitioners need to triage patients efficiently. However, since structured or rich datasets of sufficient quality from secondary to assess the performance of a CPM are scarce, a validation gap exists that hampers the implementation of CPMs in secondary care settings. In this viewpoint, we highlight the importance of targeted validation and the use of CPMs in secondary care settings and discuss the potential and challenges of using electronic health record (EHR) data to overcome the existing validation gap. The introduction of software applications for text mining of EHRs allows the generation of structured "big" datasets, but the imperfection of EHRs as a research database requires careful validation of data quality. When using EHR data for the development and validation of CPMs, in addition to widely accepted checklists, we propose considering three additional practical steps: (1) involve a local EHR expert (clinician or nurse) in the data extraction process, (2) perform validity checks on the generated datasets, and (3) provide metadata on how variables were constructed from EHRs. These steps help to generate EHR datasets that are statistically powerful, of sufficient quality and replicable, and enable targeted development and validation of CPMs in secondary care settings. This approach can fill a major gap in prediction modeling research and appropriately advance CPMs into clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.