KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, P.O. Box 43640, Nairobi, Kenya.
Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology & Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMC Med. 2022 Aug 3;20(1):236. doi: 10.1186/s12916-022-02439-5.
Two neonatal mortality prediction models, the Neonatal Essential Treatment Score (NETS) which uses treatments prescribed at admission and the Score for Essential Neonatal Symptoms and Signs (SENSS) which uses basic clinical signs, were derived in high-mortality, low-resource settings to utilise data more likely to be available in these settings. In this study, we evaluate the predictive accuracy of two neonatal prediction models for all-cause in-hospital mortality.
We used retrospectively collected routine clinical data recorded by duty clinicians at admission from 16 Kenyan hospitals used to externally validate and update the SENSS and NETS models that were initially developed from the data from the largest Kenyan maternity hospital to predict in-hospital mortality. Model performance was evaluated by assessing discrimination and calibration. Discrimination, the ability of the model to differentiate between those with and without the outcome, was measured using the c-statistic. Calibration, the agreement between predictions from the model and what was observed, was measured using the calibration intercept and slope (with values of 0 and 1 denoting perfect calibration).
At initial external validation, the estimated mortality risks from the original SENSS and NETS models were markedly overestimated with calibration intercepts of - 0.703 (95% CI - 0.738 to - 0.669) and - 1.109 (95% CI - 1.148 to - 1.069) and too extreme with calibration slopes of 0.565 (95% CI 0.552 to 0.577) and 0.466 (95% CI 0.451 to 0.480), respectively. After model updating, the calibration of the model improved. The updated SENSS and NETS models had calibration intercepts of 0.311 (95% CI 0.282 to 0.350) and 0.032 (95% CI - 0.002 to 0.066) and calibration slopes of 1.029 (95% CI 1.006 to 1.051) and 0.799 (95% CI 0.774 to 0.823), respectively, while showing good discrimination with c-statistics of 0.834 (95% CI 0.829 to 0.839) and 0.775 (95% CI 0.768 to 0.782), respectively. The overall calibration performance of the updated SENSS and NETS models was better than any existing neonatal in-hospital mortality prediction models externally validated for settings comparable to Kenya.
Few prediction models undergo rigorous external validation. We show how external validation using data from multiple locations enables model updating and improving their performance and potential value. The improved models indicate it is possible to predict in-hospital mortality using either treatments or signs and symptoms derived from routine neonatal data from low-resource hospital settings also making possible their use for case-mix adjustment when contrasting similar hospital settings.
两个新生儿死亡率预测模型,即新生儿基本治疗评分(NETS),该模型使用入院时开出的治疗方法,以及基本临床症状和体征评分(SENSS),都来自高死亡率、资源匮乏的环境,以便利用这些环境中更可能获得的数据。本研究旨在评估两种新生儿预测模型对所有原因院内死亡率的预测准确性。
我们使用了 16 家肯尼亚医院的值班医生在入院时记录的回顾性常规临床数据,用于对最初由肯尼亚最大的妇产医院数据开发的 SENSS 和 NETS 模型进行外部验证和更新,以预测院内死亡率。通过评估区分度和校准度来评估模型性能。区分度是指模型区分有和无结局的能力,使用 c 统计量来衡量。校准度是指模型预测与实际观察结果之间的一致性,使用校准截距和斜率(值为 0 和 1 表示完美校准)来衡量。
在最初的外部验证中,原始 SENSS 和 NETS 模型估计的死亡率风险明显偏高,校准截距分别为-0.703(95%CI-0.738 至-0.669)和-1.109(95%CI-1.148 至-1.069),校准斜率分别为 0.565(95%CI 0.552 至 0.577)和 0.466(95%CI 0.451 至 0.480),过于极端。经过模型更新,模型的校准得到了改善。更新后的 SENSS 和 NETS 模型的校准截距分别为 0.311(95%CI 0.282 至 0.350)和 0.032(95%CI-0.002 至 0.066),校准斜率分别为 1.029(95%CI 1.006 至 1.051)和 0.799(95%CI 0.774 至 0.823),同时具有良好的区分度,c 统计量分别为 0.834(95%CI 0.829 至 0.839)和 0.775(95%CI 0.768 至 0.782)。更新后的 SENSS 和 NETS 模型的整体校准性能优于在肯尼亚等可比环境中进行外部验证的任何现有新生儿院内死亡率预测模型。
很少有预测模型经过严格的外部验证。我们展示了如何使用来自多个地点的数据进行外部验证,从而实现模型更新,并提高其性能和潜在价值。改进后的模型表明,使用来自资源匮乏医院环境的常规新生儿数据中的治疗方法或体征和症状来预测院内死亡率是可行的,这也使得它们在对比类似医院环境时,用于病例组合调整成为可能。