Suppr超能文献

弗雷明汉威尔逊冠心病风险规则外部验证研究中的研究效率低下:系统评价。

Research inefficiencies in external validation studies of the Framingham Wilson coronary heart disease risk rule: A systematic review.

机构信息

Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Department for Continuing Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2024 Sep 13;19(9):e0310321. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310321. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

External validation studies create evidence about a clinical prediction rule's (CPR's) generalizability by evaluating and updating the CPR in populations different from those used in the derivation, and also by contributing to estimating its overall performance when meta-analysed in a systematic review. While most cardiovascular CPRs do not have any external validation, some CPRs have been externally validated repeatedly. Hence, we examined whether external validation studies of the Framingham Wilson coronary heart disease (CHD) risk rule contributed to generating evidence to their full potential.

METHODS

A forward citation search of the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule's derivation study was conducted to identify studies that evaluated the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule in different populations. For external validation studies of the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule, we examined whether authors updated the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule when it performed poorly. We also assessed the contribution of external validation studies to understanding the Predicted/Observed (P/O) event ratio and c statistic of the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule.

RESULTS

We identified 98 studies that evaluated the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule; 40 of which were external validation studies. Of these 40 studies, 27 (67.5%) concluded the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule performed poorly but did not update it. Of 23 external validation studies conducted with data that could be included in meta-analyses, 13 (56.5%) could not fully contribute to the meta-analyses of P/O ratio and/or c statistic because these performance measures were neither reported nor could be calculated from provided data.

DISCUSSION

Most external validation studies failed to generate evidence about the Framingham Wilson CHD risk rule's generalizability to their full potential. Researchers might increase the value of external validation studies by presenting all relevant performance measures and by updating the CPR when it performs poorly.

摘要

背景

外部验证研究通过评估和更新来自推导人群以外的人群中的临床预测规则 (CPR),并通过在系统评价中进行荟萃分析来帮助估计其总体性能,从而为 CPR 的可推广性创造证据。虽然大多数心血管 CPR 没有任何外部验证,但有些 CPR 已经经过多次外部验证。因此,我们研究了弗雷明汉威尔逊冠心病 (CHD) 风险规则的外部验证研究是否有助于充分发挥其潜力。

方法

对弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则的推导研究进行正向引文搜索,以确定评估不同人群中弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则的研究。对于弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则的外部验证研究,我们检查了当弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则表现不佳时,作者是否更新了该规则。我们还评估了外部验证研究对理解弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则的预测/观察 (P/O) 事件比和 c 统计的贡献。

结果

我们确定了 98 项评估弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则的研究;其中 40 项为外部验证研究。在这 40 项研究中,27 项(67.5%)得出弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则表现不佳的结论,但没有更新它。在 23 项可进行荟萃分析的数据的外部验证研究中,有 13 项(56.5%)由于未报告或无法从提供的数据中计算出这些性能指标,因此无法完全为 P/O 比和/或 c 统计的荟萃分析做出贡献。

讨论

大多数外部验证研究未能充分发挥弗雷明汉威尔逊 CHD 风险规则的可推广性。研究人员可以通过提供所有相关的性能指标并在 CPR 表现不佳时更新它来提高外部验证研究的价值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验