Gelderblom Malou E, Stevens Kelly Y R, Houterman Saskia, Weyers Steven, Schoot Benedictus C
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Women's Clinic, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Oct;265:190-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.08.013. Epub 2021 Sep 9.
The clinical application of prediction models is increasing within the field of gynaecology and obstetrics. This is mostly due to the fact that clinicians and patients prefer individualized counselling and person specific, more objective outcome assessment. To prevent using inadequate models, it is important to construct and perform prediction model studies correctly. Therefore, the TRIPOD statement (the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) was developed. The aim of this review is to obtain an overview of the existing published prediction models for benign gynaecology and to investigate to what extent these studies meet the TRIPOD criteria. We performed a literature search in the databases PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to August 2020. Searching the cross-references of the relevant studies within our search identified additional articles. Publications were included if the aim of the study was to develop a multivariable prediction model within the field of benign gynaecology. Two independent reviewers extracted the data. Analysis of the studies was performed by using a checklist derived from the TRIPOD criteria. Based on our search, 2487 studies were selected, including potential duplications. Eventually, a total of twenty-two studies were selected. 91% of these studies handled their predictors by univariable analysis before developing a multivariable prediction model. Fifteen studies described having missing data, but not all of them (9%) handled these missing data. Four different internal validation methods were used in twenty studies. Fifteen studies (68%) had prediction models with a C-index ≥ 0.7, which indicates a good model. Half of the studies (50%) did not measure the calibration, overall performance was described in two studies (9%). External validation was performed in 9% of the studies. The correct development of a prediction model within benign gynaecology and subsequent transparent reporting of the model development is important to facilitate clinical use. Without transparent reporting, wrong assumptions can be made leading to incorrect application of a specific prediction model. This overview shows that excepting carrying out an external validation, only one article met all the criteria. Therefore, we strongly recommend use of the TRIPOD criteria for developing and validating a prediction model (study). In addition, prior to publication, content experts should critically and statistically review the prediction model. If too many criteria are not met, refusing publication should be considered.
预测模型在妇产科领域的临床应用正在增加。这主要是因为临床医生和患者更喜欢个性化咨询以及针对个人的、更客观的结果评估。为防止使用不适当的模型,正确构建和开展预测模型研究很重要。因此,制定了TRIPOD声明(个体预后或诊断多变量预测模型的透明报告)。本综述的目的是概述已发表的现有良性妇科预测模型,并调查这些研究在多大程度上符合TRIPOD标准。我们在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆数据库中进行了从创建到2020年8月的文献检索。在我们检索的相关研究的参考文献中查找确定了其他文章。如果研究目的是在良性妇科领域开发多变量预测模型,则纳入该出版物。两名独立评审员提取数据。通过使用源自TRIPOD标准的清单对研究进行分析。基于我们的检索,共选择了2487项研究,包括潜在的重复研究。最终,共选择了22项研究。其中91%的研究在开发多变量预测模型之前通过单变量分析处理其预测因素。15项研究描述存在缺失数据,但并非所有研究(9%)都处理了这些缺失数据。20项研究使用了四种不同的内部验证方法。15项研究(68%)的预测模型C指数≥0.7,这表明模型良好。一半的研究(50%)未测量校准,两项研究(9%)描述了总体性能。9%的研究进行了外部验证。在良性妇科中正确开发预测模型并随后对模型开发进行透明报告对于促进临床应用很重要。没有透明报告,可能会做出错误假设,导致特定预测模型的错误应用。本综述表明,除了进行外部验证外,只有一篇文章符合所有标准。因此,我们强烈建议在开发和验证预测模型(研究)时使用TRIPOD标准。此外,在发表之前,内容专家应对预测模型进行严格的统计学审查。如果未满足太多标准,则应考虑拒绝发表。