Background: Before being used to inform patient care, a risk prediction model needs to be validated in a representative sample from the target population. The finite size of the validation sample entails that there is uncertainty with respect to estimates of model performance. We apply value-of-information methodology as a framework to quantify the consequence of such uncertainty in terms of NB. Methods: We define the Expected Value of Perfect Information (EVPI) for model validation as the expected loss in NB due to not confidently knowing which of the alternative decisions confers the highest NB at a given risk threshold. We propose methods for EVPI calculations based on Bayesian or ordinary bootstrapping of NBs, as well as an asymptotic approach supported by the central limit theorem. We conducted brief simulation studies to compare the performance of these methods, and used subsets of data from an international clinical trial for predicting mortality after myocardial infarction as a case study. Results: The three computation methods generated similar EVPI values in simulation studies. In the case study, at the pre-specified threshold of 0.02, the best decision with current information would be to use the model, with an expected incremental NB of 0.0020 over treating all. At this threshold, EVPI was 0.0005 (a relative EVPI of 25%). When scaled to the annual number of heart attacks in the US, this corresponds to a loss of 400 true positives, or extra 19,600 false positives (unnecessary treatments) per year, indicating the value of further model validation. As expected, the validation EVPI generally declined with larger samples. Conclusion: Value-of-information methods can be applied to the NB calculated during external validation of clinical prediction models to provide a decision-theoretic perspective to the consequences of uncertainty.
翻译:背景:在用于向患者提供护理信息之前,需要从目标人群的具有代表性的样本中验证风险预测模型。验证样本的有限规模意味着模型性性能的估算存在不确定性。我们采用信息价值方法作为框架,以量化这些不确定性在NB方面的后果。 方法:我们定义了模型验证的完美信息的预期值,作为模型验证的预期损失,因为我们不自信地知道哪些替代决定在特定风险阈值上得出了最高NB值。我们建议了基于Bayesian或普通NBs运行的EVP计算方法,以及一种由中央限理论支持的无保障方法。我们进行了简短的模拟研究,以比较这些方法的性能,并使用国际临床试验的一组数据,以预测心电图后死亡率。结果:三种计算方法在模拟研究中得出类似的EVPI值值。在0.20前的临界值值上,目前准确值的最佳决定值在中央限值值值下进行,在25号外部估值中,预算出这个指数值的数值值值在25号的数值上,预算出这个指数值。