Dataset Information

External validation of type 2 diabetes computer simulation models: definitions, approaches, implications and room for improvement-a protocol for a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), a highly prevalent chronic disease, puts a large burden on individual health and health care systems. Computer simulation models, used to evaluate the clinical and economic effectiveness of various interventions to handle T2DM, have become a well-established tool in diabetes research. Despite the broad consensus about the general importance of validation, especially external validation, as a crucial instrument of assessing and controlling for the quality of these models, there are no systematic reviews comparing such validation of diabetes models. As a result, the main objectives of this systematic review are to identify and appraise the different approaches used for the external validation of existing models covering the development and progression of T2DM. METHODS:We will perform adapted searches by applying respective search strategies to identify suitable studies from 14 electronic databases. Retrieved study records will be included or excluded based on predefined eligibility criteria as defined in this protocol. Among others, a publication filter will exclude studies published before 1995. We will run abstract and full text screenings and then extract data from all selected studies by filling in a predefined data extraction spreadsheet. We will undertake a descriptive, narrative synthesis of findings to address the study objectives. We will pay special attention to aspects of quality of these models in regard to the external validation based upon ISPOR and ADA recommendations as well as Mount Hood Challenge reports. All critical stages within the screening, data extraction and synthesis processes will be conducted by at least two authors. This protocol adheres to PRISMA and PRISMA-P standards. DISCUSSION:The proposed systematic review will provide a broad overview of the current practice in the external validation of models with respect to T2DM incidence and progression in humans built on simulation techniques. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42017069983 .

SUBMITTER: Ogurtsova K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5746956 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDiabetes is a major public health problem and prediabetes (intermediate hyperglycaemia) is associated with a high risk of developing diabetes. With evidence supporting the use of preventive interventions for prediabetes populations and the discovery of novel biomarkers stratifying the risk of progression, there is a need to evaluate their cost-effectiveness across jurisdictions. In diabetes and prediabetes, it is relevant to inform cost-effectiveness analysis using decision models due to their ability to forecast long-term health outcomes and costs beyond the time frame of clinical trials. To support good implementation and reimbursement decisions of interventions in these populations, models should be clinically credible, based on best available evidence, reproducible and validated against clinical data. Our aim is to identify recent studies on computer simulation models and model-based economic evaluations of populations of individuals with prediabetes, qualify them and discuss the knowledge gaps, challenges and opportunities that need to be addressed for future evaluations.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. We will extract peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2016 that describe computer simulation models of the natural history of individuals with prediabetes and/or decision models to evaluate the impact of interventions, risk stratification and/or screening on these populations. Two reviewers will independently assess each study for inclusion. Data will be extracted using a predefined pro forma developed using best practice. Study quality will be assessed using a modelling checklist. A narrative synthesis of all studies will be presented, focussing on model structure, quality of models and input data, and validation status.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review is exempt from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. The findings of the review will be disseminated in a related peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.Reviewregistration numberCRD42016047228.

Project description:BackgroundSimulation models have been applied to analyze daily living activities and some sports movements. However, it is unknown whether the current upper extremity musculoskeletal models can be utilized for investigating cue sports movements to generate corresponding kinematic and muscle activation profiles. This study aimed to test the feasibility of applying simulation models to investigate cue sports players' cueing movements with OpenSim. Preliminary muscle forces would be calculated once the model is validated.MethodsA previously customized and validated unimanual upper extremity musculoskeletal model with six degrees of freedom at the scapula, shoulder, elbow, and wrist, as well as muscles was used in this study. Two types of cueing movements were simulated: (1) the back spin shot, and (2) 9-ball break shot. Firstly, kinematic data of the upper extremity joints were collected with a 3D motion capture system. Using the experimental marker trajectories of the back spin shot on 10 male cue sports players, the simulation on the cueing movements was executed. The model was then validated by comparing the model-generated joint angles against the experimental results using statistical parametric mapping (SPM1D) to examine the entire angle-time waveform as well as t-tests to compare the discrete variables (e.g., joint range of motion). Secondly, simulation of the break shot was run with the experimental marker trajectories and electromyographic (EMG) data of two male cue sports players as the model inputs. A model-estimated muscle activation calculation was performed accordingly for the upper extremity muscles.ResultsThe OpenSim-generated joint angles for the back spin shot corresponded well with the experimental results for the elbow, while the model outputs of the shoulder deviated from the experimental data. The discrepancy in shoulder joint angles could be due to the insufficient kinematic inputs for the shoulder joint. In the break shot simulation, the preliminary findings suggested that great shoulder muscle forces could primarily contribute to the forward swing in a break shot. This suggests that strengthening the shoulder muscles may be a viable strategy to improve the break shot performance.ConclusionIt is feasible to cater simulation modeling in OpenSim for biomechanical investigations of the upper extremity movements in cue sports. Model outputs can help better understand the contributions of individual muscle forces when performing cueing movements.

Project description:IntroductionExternal validation studies are essential to study the generalizability of prediction models. Recently a permutation test, focusing on discrimination as quantified by the c-statistic, was proposed to judge whether a prediction model is transportable to a new setting. We aimed to evaluate this test and compare it to previously proposed procedures to judge any changes in c-statistic from development to external validation setting.MethodsWe compared the use of the permutation test to the use of benchmark values of the c-statistic following from a previously proposed framework to judge transportability of a prediction model. In a simulation study we developed a prediction model with logistic regression on a development set and validated them in the validation set. We concentrated on two scenarios: 1) the case-mix was more heterogeneous and predictor effects were weaker in the validation set compared to the development set, and 2) the case-mix was less heterogeneous in the validation set and predictor effects were identical in the validation and development set. Furthermore we illustrated the methods in a case study using 15 datasets of patients suffering from traumatic brain injury.ResultsThe permutation test indicated that the validation and development set were homogenous in scenario 1 (in almost all simulated samples) and heterogeneous in scenario 2 (in 17%-39% of simulated samples). Previously proposed benchmark values of the c-statistic and the standard deviation of the linear predictors correctly pointed at the more heterogeneous case-mix in scenario 1 and the less heterogeneous case-mix in scenario 2.ConclusionThe recently proposed permutation test may provide misleading results when externally validating prediction models in the presence of case-mix differences between the development and validation population. To correctly interpret the c-statistic found at external validation it is crucial to disentangle case-mix differences from incorrect regression coefficients.

Project description:We propose a cost-effective sampling design and estimating procedure for validating personal risk models using right-censored cohort data. Validation involves using each subject's covariates, as ascertained at cohort entry, in a risk model (specified independently of the data) to assign him/her a probability of an adverse outcome within a future time period. Subjects are then grouped according to the magnitudes of their assigned risks, and within each group, the mean assigned risk is compared with the probability of outcome occurrence as estimated using the follow-up data. Such validation presents two complications. First, in the presence of right-censoring, estimating the probability of developing the outcomes before death requires competing risk analysis. Second, for rare outcomes, validation using the full cohort requires assembling covariates and assigning risks to thousands of subjects. This can be costly when some covariates involve analyzing biological specimens. A two-stage sampling design addresses this problem by assembling covariates and assigning risks only to those subjects most informative for estimating key parameters. We use this design to estimate the outcome probabilities needed to evaluate model performance and we provide theoretical and bootstrap estimates of their variances. We also describe how to choose two-stage designs with minimal efficiency loss for a parameter of interest when the quantities determining optimality are unknown at the time of design. We illustrate these methods by using subjects in the California Teachers Study to validate ovarian cancer risk models. We find that a design with optimal efficiency for one performance parameter need not be so for others, and trade-offs will be required. A two-stage design that samples all outcome-positive subjects and more outcome-negative than censored subjects will perform well in most circumstances. The methods are implemented in Risk Model Assessment Program, an R program freely available at http://med.stanford.edu/epidemiology/two-stage.html.

Dataset Information

External validation of type 2 diabetes computer simulation models: definitions, approaches, implications and room for improvement-a protocol for a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets