IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0149895.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Validation of Prediction Models for Pneumonia in Primary Care Patients with Lower Respiratory Tract Infection: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Alwin Schierenberg
  • Margaretha C Minnaard
  • Rogier M Hopstaken
  • Alma C van de Pol
  • Berna D L Broekhuizen
  • Niek J de Wit
  • Johannes B Reitsma
  • Saskia F van Vugt
  • Aleida W Graffelman
  • Hasse Melbye
  • Timothy H Rainer
  • Johann Steurer
  • Anette Holm
  • Ralph Gonzales
  • Geert-Jan Dinant
  • Joris A H de Groot
  • Theo J M Verheij

Abstract

Background: Pneumonia remains difficult to diagnose in primary care. Prediction models based on signs and symptoms (S&S) serve to minimize the diagnostic uncertainty. External validation of these models is essential before implementation into routine practice. In this study all published S&S models for prediction of pneumonia in primary care were externally validated in the individual patient data (IPD) of previously performed diagnostic studies. Methods and Findings: S&S models for diagnosing pneumonia in adults presenting to primary care with lower respiratory tract infection and IPD for validation were identified through a systematical search. Six prediction models and IPD of eight diagnostic studies (N total = 5308, prevalence pneumonia 12%) were included. Models were assessed on discrimination and calibration. Discrimination was measured using the pooled Area Under the Curve (AUC) and delta AUC, representing the performance of an individual model relative to the average dataset performance. Prediction models by van Vugt et al. and Heckerling et al. demonstrated the highest pooled AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.74–0.85) and 0.72 (0.68–0.76), respectively. Other models by Diehr et al., Singal et al., Melbye et al., and Hopstaken et al. demonstrated pooled AUCs of 0.65 (0.61–0.68), 0.64 (0.61–0.67), 0.56 (0.49–0.63) and 0.53 (0.5–0.56), respectively. A similar ranking was present based on the delta AUCs of the models. Calibration demonstrated close agreement of observed and predicted probabilities in the models by van Vugt et al. and Singal et al., other models lacked such correspondence. The absence of predictors in the IPD on dataset level hampered a systematical comparison of model performance and could be a limitation to the study. Conclusions: The model by van Vugt et al. demonstrated the highest discriminative accuracy coupled with reasonable to good calibration across the IPD of different study populations. This model is therefore the main candidate for primary care use.

Suggested Citation

  • Alwin Schierenberg & Margaretha C Minnaard & Rogier M Hopstaken & Alma C van de Pol & Berna D L Broekhuizen & Niek J de Wit & Johannes B Reitsma & Saskia F van Vugt & Aleida W Graffelman & Hasse Melby, 2016. "External Validation of Prediction Models for Pneumonia in Primary Care Patients with Lower Respiratory Tract Infection: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0149895
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149895
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0149895
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0149895&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0149895?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ewout W Steyerberg & Karel G M Moons & Danielle A van der Windt & Jill A Hayden & Pablo Perel & Sara Schroter & Richard D Riley & Harry Hemingway & Douglas G Altman & for the PROGRESS Group, 2013. "Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 3: Prognostic Model Research," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-9, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nath Adulkasem & Phichayut Phinyo & Jiraporn Khorana & Dumnoensun Pruksakorn & Theerachai Apivatthakakul, 2021. "Development of Clinical Prediction Rules for One-Year Postoperative Functional Outcome in Patients with Intertrochanteric Fractures: The Intertrochanteric Fracture Ambulatory Prediction (IT-AP) Tool," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Julius Sim & Lucy Teece & Martin S Dennis & Christine Roffe & SOࠢS Study Team, 2016. "Validation and Recalibration of Two Multivariable Prognostic Models for Survival and Independence in Acute Stroke," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Phung Khanh Lam & Dong Thi Hoai Tam & Nguyen Minh Dung & Nguyen Thi Hanh Tien & Nguyen Tan Thanh Kieu & Cameron Simmons & Jeremy Farrar & Bridget Wills & Marcel Wolbers, 2015. "A Prognostic Model for Development of Profound Shock among Children Presenting with Dengue Shock Syndrome," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    4. Mario Dioguardi & Francesca Spirito & Diego Sovereto & Mario Alovisi & Giuseppe Troiano & Riccardo Aiuto & Daniele Garcovich & Vito Crincoli & Luigi Laino & Angela Pia Cazzolla & Giorgia Apollonia Cal, 2022. "MicroRNA-21 Expression as a Prognostic Biomarker in Oral Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-12, March.
    5. Catherine Beauregard-Paultre & Claire Nour Abou Chakra & Allison McGeer & Annie-Claude Labbé & Andrew E Simor & Wayne Gold & Matthew P Muller & Jeff Powis & Kevin Katz & Suzanne M Cadarette & Jacques , 2019. "External validation of clinical prediction rules for complications and mortality following Clostridioides difficile infection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Andrew D A C Smith & Kate Tilling & Debbie A Lawlor & Scott M Nelson, 2015. "External Validation and Calibration of IVFpredict: A National Prospective Cohort Study of 130,960 In Vitro Fertilisation Cycles," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Stephana J Cherak & Andrea Soo & Kyla N Brown & E Wesley Ely & Henry T Stelfox & Kirsten M Fiest, 2020. "Development and validation of delirium prediction model for critically ill adults parameterized to ICU admission acuity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, August.
    8. Igor O Korolev & Laura L Symonds & Andrea C Bozoki & Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, 2016. "Predicting Progression from Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Dementia Using Clinical, MRI, and Plasma Biomarkers via Probabilistic Pattern Classification," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-25, February.
    9. Jia You & Yu Guo & Yi Zhang & Ju-Jiao Kang & Lin-Bo Wang & Jian-Feng Feng & Wei Cheng & Jin-Tai Yu, 2023. "Plasma proteomic profiles predict individual future health risk," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Jakob Steinfeldt & Benjamin Wild & Thore Buergel & Maik Pietzner & Julius Upmeier zu Belzen & Andre Vauvelle & Stefan Hegselmann & Spiros Denaxas & Harry Hemingway & Claudia Langenberg & Ulf Landmesse, 2024. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Medical history predicts phenome-wide disease onset and enables the rapid response to emerging health threats," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Todd J. Levy & Kevin Coppa & Jinxuan Cang & Douglas P. Barnaby & Marc D. Paradis & Stuart L. Cohen & Alex Makhnevich & David Klaveren & David M. Kent & Karina W. Davidson & Jamie S. Hirsch & Theodoros, 2022. "Development and validation of self-monitoring auto-updating prognostic models of survival for hospitalized COVID-19 patients," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Jiakun Jiang & Wei Yang & Erin M. Schnellinger & Stephen E. Kimmel & Wensheng Guo, 2023. "Dynamic logistic state space prediction model for clinical decision making," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 73-85, March.
    13. François Luthi & Olivier Deriaz & Philippe Vuistiner & Cyrille Burrus & Roger Hilfiker, 2014. "Predicting Non Return to Work after Orthopaedic Trauma: The Wallis Occupational Rehabilitation RisK (WORRK) Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-11, April.
    14. Daan Nieboer & Tjeerd van der Ploeg & Ewout W Steyerberg, 2016. "Assessing Discriminative Performance at External Validation of Clinical Prediction Models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-10, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0149895. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.