Statistical methods for dementia risk prediction and recommendations for future work: A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Goerdten J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6804431 | biostudies-literature | 2019
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Statistical methods for dementia risk prediction and recommendations for future work: A systematic review.
Goerdten Jantje J Čukić Iva I Danso Samuel O SO Carrière Isabelle I Muniz-Terrera Graciela G
Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 20191008
<h4>Introduction</h4>Numerous dementia risk prediction models have been developed in the past decade. However, methodological limitations of the analytical tools used may hamper their ability to generate reliable dementia risk scores. We aim to review the used methodologies.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed the literature from March 2014 to September 2018 for publications presenting a <i>dementia</i> risk prediction model. We critically discuss the analytical techniques used in the lite ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAccurate identification of individuals at high risk of dementia influences clinical care, inclusion criteria for clinical trials and development of preventative strategies. Numerous models have been developed for predicting dementia. To evaluate these models we undertook a systematic review in 2010 and updated this in 2014 due to the increase in research published in this area. Here we include a critique of the variables selected for inclusion and an assessment of model prognostic performance.MethodsOur previous systematic review was updated with a search from January 2009 to March 2014 in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science). Articles examining risk of dementia in non-demented individuals and including measures of sensitivity, specificity or the area under the curve (AUC) or c-statistic were included.FindingsIn total, 1,234 articles were identified from the search; 21 articles met inclusion criteria. New developments in dementia risk prediction include the testing of non-APOE genes, use of non-traditional dementia risk factors, incorporation of diet, physical function and ethnicity, and model development in specific subgroups of the population including individuals with diabetes and those with different educational levels. Four models have been externally validated. Three studies considered time or cost implications of computing the model.InterpretationThere is no one model that is recommended for dementia risk prediction in population-based settings. Further, it is unlikely that one model will fit all. Consideration of the optimal features of new models should focus on methodology (setting/sample, model development and testing in a replication cohort) and the acceptability and cost of attaining the risk variables included in the prediction score. Further work is required to validate existing models or develop new ones in different populations as well as determine the ethical implications of dementia risk prediction, before applying the particular models in population or clinical settings.
| S-EPMC4559315 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinicians have an increasing number of evidence-based interventions to treat pain in youth. Mediation analysis offers a way of investigating how interventions work, by examining the extent to which an intermediate variable, or mediator, explains the effect of an intervention. This systematic review examined studies that used mediation analysis to investigate mechanisms of interventions on pain-relevant outcomes for youth (3-18 years) with acute or chronic pain, and provides recommendations for future mediation research in this field. We searched five electronic databases for clinical trials or observational longitudinal studies that included a comparison group and conducted mediation analyses of interventions on youth and assessed pain outcomes. We found six studies (N = 635), which included a total of 53 mediation models examining how interventions affect pain-relevant outcomes for youth. Five studies were secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions for chronic pain; one was a longitudinal observational study of morphine for acute pain. The pain conditions studied were irritable bowel syndrome, functional abdominal pain, juvenile fibromyalgia, mixed chronic pain, and post-operative pain. Fourteen putative mediators were tested, of which three partially mediated treatment effect; seven did not significantly mediate treatment effect and four had mixed results. Methodological and reporting limitations were common. There are substantial gaps in the field with respect to investigating, and therefore understanding, how paediatric interventions work.
| S-EPMC7919827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have rapidly become a standard method for disease gene discovery. A substantial number of recent GWAS indicate that for most disorders, only a few common variants are implicated and the associated SNPs explain only a small fraction of the genetic risk. This review is written from the viewpoint that findings from the GWAS provide preliminary genetic information that is available for additional analysis by statistical procedures that accumulate evidence, and that these secondary analyses are very likely to provide valuable information that will help prioritize the strongest constellations of results. We review and discuss three analytic methods to combine preliminary GWAS statistics to identify genes, alleles, and pathways for deeper investigations. Meta-analysis seeks to pool information from multiple GWAS to increase the chances of finding true positives among the false positives and provides a way to combine associations across GWAS, even when the original data are unavailable. Testing for epistasis within a single GWAS study can identify the stronger results that are revealed when genes interact. Pathway analysis of GWAS results is used to prioritize genes and pathways within a biological context. Following a GWAS, association results can be assigned to pathways and tested in aggregate with computational tools and pathway databases. Reviews of published methods with recommendations for their application are provided within the framework for each approach.
| S-EPMC2801749 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNational dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.Methods and findingsWe searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country's official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded.ConclusionsNational guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world's countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.
| S-EPMC8752020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify and summarise all studies using statistical methods to project lung cancer incidence or mortality rates more than 5 years into the future.Study typeSystematic review.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search in multiple electronic databases to identify studies published from 1 January 1988 to 14 August 2018, which used statistical methods to project lung cancer incidence and/or mortality rates. Reference lists of relevant articles were checked for additional potentially relevant articles. We developed an organisational framework to classify methods into groups according to the type of data and the statistical models used. Included studies were critically appraised using prespecified criteria.ResultsOne hundred and one studies met the inclusion criteria; six studies used more than one statistical method. The number of studies reporting statistical projections for lung cancer increased substantially over time. Eighty-eight studies used projection methods, which did not incorporate data on smoking in the population, and 16 studies used a method which did incorporate data on smoking. Age-period-cohort models (44 studies) were the most commonly used methods, followed by other generalised linear models (35 studies). The majority of models were developed using observed rates for more than 10?years and used data that were considered to be good quality. A quarter of studies provided comparisons of fitted and observed rates. While validation by withholding the most recent observed data from the model and then comparing the projected and observed rates for the most recent period provides important information on the model's performance, only 12 studies reported doing this.ConclusionThis systematic review provides an up-to-date summary of the statistical methods used in published lung cancer incidence or mortality projections. The assessment of the strengths of existing methods will help researchers to better apply and develop statistical methods for projecting lung cancer rates. Some of the common methods described in this review can be applied to the projection of rates for other cancer types or other non-infectious diseases.
| S-EPMC6720154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSystematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies are frequently performed, but no widely accepted guidance is available at present. We performed a systematic scoping review of published methodological recommendations on how to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies.MethodsWe searched online databases and websites and contacted experts in the field to locate potentially eligible articles. We included articles that provided any type of recommendation on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. We extracted and summarised recommendations on pre-defined key items: protocol development, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, dealing with different study designs, risk of bias assessment, publication bias, heterogeneity, statistical analysis. We summarised recommendations by key item, identifying areas of agreement and disagreement as well as areas where recommendations were missing or scarce.ResultsThe searches identified 2461 articles of which 93 were eligible. Many recommendations for reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies were transferred from guidance developed for reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. Although there was substantial agreement in some methodological areas there was also considerable disagreement on how evidence synthesis of observational studies should be conducted. Conflicting recommendations were seen on topics such as the inclusion of different study designs in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the use of quality scales to assess the risk of bias, and the choice of model (e.g. fixed vs. random effects) for meta-analysis.ConclusionThere is a need for sound methodological guidance on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies, which critically considers areas in which there are conflicting recommendations.
| S-EPMC5963098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:There is a recent and growing research literature on alcohol use and related harms among transgender and other gender minority populations; however, current definitions and measures of hazardous drinking do not consider the complexity of physiological sex characteristics and socially constructed gender, raising doubts regarding their validity, applicability, and use with these populations. To address this, we reviewed current research on alcohol-related outcomes in transgender populations and critically summarized key issues for consideration in future research. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review of transgender alcohol research in English language, peer-reviewed journals, published 1990-2017, and extracted key details (e.g., sample composition, alcohol measures, results). RESULTS:Forty-four studies met all inclusion criteria for the review, the majority of which were conducted in the United States. The prevalence of hazardous drinking was high; however, estimates varied widely across studies. We noted frequent methodological weaknesses, including few attempts to differentiate sex and gender, poor attention to appropriate definitions of hazardous drinking, and reliance on cross-sectional study designs and non-probability sampling methods. CONCLUSION:Given findings that suggest high need for ongoing public health attention, we offer recommendations to improve future alcohol studies with transgender and other gender minority populations, such as being explicit as to whether and how sex and/or gender are operationalized and relevant for the research question, expanding the repertoire of alcohol measures to include those not contingent on sex or gender, testing the psychometric performance of established screening instruments with transgender populations, and shifting from descriptive to analytic study designs.
| S-EPMC5911250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Depression is a major public health problem among youth, currently estimated to affect as many as 9% of US children and adolescents. The recognition that both genes (nature) and environments (nurture) are important for understanding the etiology of depression has led to a rapid growth in research exploring gene-environment interactions (GxE). However, there has been no systematic review of GxE in youth depression to date.The goal of this article was to systematically review evidence on the contribution of GxE to the risk of child and adolescent depression. Through a search of PubMed and PsycINFO databases to 1 April 2010, we identified 20 candidate gene-environment interaction studies focused on depression in youth (up to age 26) and compared each study in terms of the following characteristics: research design and sample studied; measure of depression and environment used; genes explored; and GxE findings in relation to these factors.In total, 80% of studies (n = 16) found at least one significant GxE association. However, there was wide variation in methods and analyses adopted across studies, especially with respect to environmental measures used and tests conducted to estimate GxE. This heterogeneity made it difficult to compare findings and evaluate the strength of the evidence for GxE.The existing body of GxE research on depression in youth contains studies that are conceptually and methodologically quite different, which contributes to mixed findings and makes it difficult to assess the current state of the evidence. To decrease this heterogeneity, we offer 20 recommendations that are focused on: (a) reporting GxE research; (b) testing and reporting GxE effects; (c) conceptualizing, measuring and analyzing depression; (d) conceptualizing, measuring and analyzing environment; (e) increasing power to test for GxE; and (f) improving the quality of genetic data used. Although targeted to GxE research on depression, these recommendations can be adopted by GxE researchers focusing on other mental health outcomes.
| S-EPMC3202044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe investigated the reporting and methods of prediction studies, focusing on aims, designs, participant selection, outcomes, predictors, statistical power, statistical methods, and predictive performance measures.Methods and findingsWe used a full hand search to identify all prediction studies published in 2008 in six high impact general medical journals. We developed a comprehensive item list to systematically score conduct and reporting of the studies, based on recent recommendations for prediction research. Two reviewers independently scored the studies. We retrieved 71 papers for full text review: 51 were predictor finding studies, 14 were prediction model development studies, three addressed an external validation of a previously developed model, and three reported on a model's impact on participant outcome. Study design was unclear in 15% of studies, and a prospective cohort was used in most studies (60%). Descriptions of the participants and definitions of predictor and outcome were generally good. Despite many recommendations against doing so, continuous predictors were often dichotomized (32% of studies). The number of events per predictor as a measure of statistical power could not be determined in 67% of the studies; of the remainder, 53% had fewer than the commonly recommended value of ten events per predictor. Methods for a priori selection of candidate predictors were described in most studies (68%). A substantial number of studies relied on a p-value cut-off of p<0.05 to select predictors in the multivariable analyses (29%). Predictive model performance measures, i.e., calibration and discrimination, were reported in 12% and 27% of studies, respectively.ConclusionsThe majority of prediction studies in high impact journals do not follow current methodological recommendations, limiting their reliability and applicability.
| S-EPMC3358324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Fueled by the successes of genome-wide association studies, numerous studies have investigated the predictive ability of genetic risk models in type 2 diabetes. In this paper, we review these studies from a methodological perspective, focusing on the variables included in the risk models as well as the study designs and populations investigated. We argue and show that differences in study design and characteristics of the study population have an impact on the observed predictive ability of risk models. This observation emphasizes that genetic risk prediction studies should be conducted in those populations in which the prediction models will ultimately be applied, if proven useful. Of all genetic risk prediction studies to date, only a few were conducted in populations that might be relevant for targeting preventive interventions.
| S-EPMC3207129 | biostudies-literature