Don't be misled: 3 misconceptions about external validation of clinical prediction models.

Hannah M la Roi-Teeuw,Florien S van Royen,Anne de Hond,Anum Zahra,Sjoerd de Vries, Richard Bartels, Alex J Carriero,Sander van Doorn, Zoë S Dunias,Ilse Kant, Tuur Leeuwenberg, Ruben Peters, Laura Veerhoek,Maarten van Smeden,Kim Luijken

Journal of clinical epidemiology(2024)

引用 0|浏览3
暂无评分
摘要
Clinical prediction models provide risks of health outcomes that can inform patients and support medical decisions. However, most models never make it to actual implementation in practice. A commonly heard reason for this lack of implementation is that prediction models are often not externally validated. While we generally encourage external validation, we argue that an external validation is often neither sufficient nor required as an essential step before implementation. As such, any available external validation should not be perceived as a license for model implementation. We clarify this argument by discussing 3 common misconceptions about external validation. We argue that there is not one type of recommended validation design, not always a necessity for external validation, and sometimes a need for multiple external validations. The insights from this paper can help readers to consider, design, interpret, and appreciate external validation studies.
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要