Guidance of development, validation, and evaluation of algorithms for populating health status in observational studies of routinely collected data (DEVELOP-RCD)

被引:1
作者
Wang, Wen [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Jin, Ying-Hui [4 ]
Liu, Mei [1 ,2 ,3 ]
He, Qiao [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Xu, Jia-Yue [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Wang, Ming-Qi [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Li, Guo-Wei [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Fu, Bo [8 ]
Yan, Si-Yu [4 ]
Zou, Kang [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Sun, Xin [1 ,2 ,3 ,9 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp, Inst Integrated Tradit Chinese & Western Med, Chinese Evidence Based Med & Cochrane China Ctr, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
[2] NMPA Key Lab Real World Data Res & Evaluat Hainan, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
[3] Sichuan Ctr Technol Innovat Real World Data, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
[4] Wuhan Univ, Zhongnan Hosp, Ctr Evidence Based & Translat Med, Wuhan 430071, Peoples R China
[5] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada
[6] Guangdong Second Prov Gen Hosp, Ctr Clin Epidemiol & Methodol, Guangzhou 510317, Peoples R China
[7] St Josephs Healthcare Hamilton, Biostat Unit, Res Inst, Hamilton, ON L8N 4A6, Canada
[8] Univ Elect Sci & Technol China, Sch Comp Sci & Engn, Chengdu 611731, Peoples R China
[9] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp 4, West China Sch Publ Hlth, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Routinely collected healthcare data; Algorithms; Health status; Guidance; QUANTITATIVE BIAS ANALYSIS; ADMINISTRATIVE DATABASE; OUTCOME MISCLASSIFICATION; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION; DIAGNOSTIC-ACCURACY; VALIDITY; RISK;
D O I
10.1186/s40779-024-00559-y
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BackgroundIn recent years, there has been a growing trend in the utilization of observational studies that make use of routinely collected healthcare data (RCD). These studies rely on algorithms to identify specific health conditions (e.g. diabetes or sepsis) for statistical analyses. However, there has been substantial variation in the algorithm development and validation, leading to frequently suboptimal performance and posing a significant threat to the validity of study findings. Unfortunately, these issues are often overlooked.MethodsWe systematically developed guidance for the development, validation, and evaluation of algorithms designed to identify health status (DEVELOP-RCD). Our initial efforts involved conducting both a narrative review and a systematic review of published studies on the concepts and methodological issues related to algorithm development, validation, and evaluation. Subsequently, we conducted an empirical study on an algorithm for identifying sepsis. Based on these findings, we formulated specific workflow and recommendations for algorithm development, validation, and evaluation within the guidance. Finally, the guidance underwent independent review by a panel of 20 external experts who then convened a consensus meeting to finalize it.ResultsA standardized workflow for algorithm development, validation, and evaluation was established. Guided by specific health status considerations, the workflow comprises four integrated steps: assessing an existing algorithm's suitability for the target health status; developing a new algorithm using recommended methods; validating the algorithm using prescribed performance measures; and evaluating the impact of the algorithm on study results. Additionally, 13 good practice recommendations were formulated with detailed explanations. Furthermore, a practical study on sepsis identification was included to demonstrate the application of this guidance.ConclusionsThe establishment of guidance is intended to aid researchers and clinicians in the appropriate and accurate development and application of algorithms for identifying health status from RCD. This guidance has the potential to enhance the credibility of findings from observational studies involving RCD.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 67 条
  • [1] Prospective, multi-site study of patient outcomes after implementation of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system for sepsis
    Adams, Roy
    Henry, Katharine E.
    Sridharan, Anirudh
    Soleimani, Hossein
    Zhan, Andong
    Rawat, Nishi
    Johnson, Lauren
    Hager, David N.
    Cosgrove, Sara E.
    Markowski, Andrew
    Klein, Eili Y.
    Chen, Edward S.
    Saheed, Mustapha O.
    Henley, Maureen
    Miranda, Sheila
    Houston, Katrina
    Linton, Robert C.
    Ahluwalia, Anushree R.
    Wu, Albert W.
    Saria, Suchi
    [J]. NATURE MEDICINE, 2022, 28 (07) : 1455 - +
  • [2] Sample sizes of studies on diagnostic accuracy: literature survey
    Bachmann, LM
    Puhan, MA
    ter Riet, G
    Bossuyt, PM
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 332 (7550): : 1127 - 1129
  • [3] Monte Carlo Simulation Approaches for Quantitative Bias Analysis: A Tutorial
    Banack, Hailey R.
    Hayes-Larson, Eleanor
    Mayeda, Elizabeth Rose
    [J]. EPIDEMIOLOGIC REVIEWS, 2021, 43 (01) : 106 - 117
  • [4] Banack HR, 2018, EPIDEMIOLOGY, V29, P604, DOI [10.1097/EDE.0000000000000863, 10.1097/ede.0000000000000863]
  • [5] Advances in Electronic Phenotyping: From Rule-Based Definitions to Machine Learning Models
    Banda, Juan M.
    Seneviratne, Martin
    Hernandez-Boussard, Tina
    Shah, Nigam H.
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF BIOMEDICAL DATA SCIENCE, VOL 1, 2018, 1 : 53 - 68
  • [6] The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) Statement
    Benchimol, Eric I.
    Smeeth, Liam
    Guttmann, Astrid
    Harron, Katie
    Moher, David
    Petersen, Irene
    Sorensen, Henrik T.
    von Elm, Erik
    Langan, Sinead M.
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2015, 12 (10)
  • [7] Development and use of reporting guidelines for assessing the quality of validation studies of health administrative data
    Benchimol, Eric I.
    Manuel, Douglas G.
    To, Teresa
    Griffiths, Anne M.
    Rabeneck, Linda
    Guttmann, Astrid
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 64 (08) : 821 - 829
  • [8] Inflation of type I error rates due to differential misclassification in EHR-derived outcomes: Empirical illustration using breast cancer recurrence
    Chen, Yong
    Wang, Jianqiao
    Chubak, Jessica
    Hubbard, Rebecca A.
    [J]. PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2019, 28 (02) : 264 - 268
  • [9] Tradeoffs between accuracy measures for electronic health care data algorithms
    Chubak, Jessica
    Pocobelli, Gaia
    Weiss, Noel S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 65 (03) : 343 - 349
  • [10] Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety's special issue on validation studies
    Chun, Danielle S.
    Lund, Jennifer L.
    Sturmer, Til
    [J]. PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2019, 28 (02) : 123 - 125