↓ Skip to main content

Validation of prediction models: examining temporal and geographic stability of baseline risk and estimated covariate effects

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic and Prognostic Research, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 113)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of prediction models: examining temporal and geographic stability of baseline risk and estimated covariate effects
Published in
Diagnostic and Prognostic Research, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41512-017-0012-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter C. Austin, David van Klaveren, Yvonne Vergouwe, Daan Nieboer, Douglas S. Lee, Ewout W. Steyerberg

Abstract

Stability in baseline risk and estimated predictor effects both geographically and temporally is a desirable property of clinical prediction models. However, this issue has received little attention in the methodological literature. Our objective was to examine methods for assessing temporal and geographic heterogeneity in baseline risk and predictor effects in prediction models. We studied 14,857 patients hospitalized with heart failure at 90 hospitals in Ontario, Canada, in two time periods. We focussed on geographic and temporal variation in baseline risk (intercept) and predictor effects (regression coefficients) of the EFFECT-HF mortality model for predicting 1-year mortality in patients hospitalized for heart failure. We used random effects logistic regression models for the 14,857 patients. The baseline risk of mortality displayed moderate geographic variation, with the hospital-specific probability of 1-year mortality for a reference patient lying between 0.168 and 0.290 for 95% of hospitals. Furthermore, the odds of death were 11% lower in the second period than in the first period. However, we found minimal geographic or temporal variation in predictor effects. Among 11 tests of differences in time for predictor variables, only one had a modestly significant P value (0.03). This study illustrates how temporal and geographic heterogeneity of prediction models can be assessed in settings with a large sample of patients from a large number of centers at different time periods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 24%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Lecturer 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 29%
Computer Science 3 8%
Psychology 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 15 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2022.
All research outputs
#4,334,239
of 23,666,535 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
#42
of 113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,193
of 311,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,666,535 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,067 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.