初级保健成人哮喘发作预测模型:对已报告方法和结果的系统回顾

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY
Lijun Ma, Holly Tibble
{"title":"初级保健成人哮喘发作预测模型:对已报告方法和结果的系统回顾","authors":"Lijun Ma, Holly Tibble","doi":"10.2147/jaa.s445450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Abstract:</strong> Prognostic models hold great potential for predicting asthma exacerbations, providing opportunities for early intervention, and are a popular area of current research. However, it is unclear how models should be compared and contrasted, given their differences in both design and performance, particularly with a view to potential implementation in routine practice. This systematic review aimed to identify novel predictive models of asthma attacks in adults and compare differences in construction related to populations, outcome definitions, prediction time horizons, algorithms, validation, and performance estimation. Twenty-five studies were identified for comparison, with varying definitions of asthma attacks and prediction event time horizons ranging from 15 days to 30 months. The most commonly used algorithm was logistic regression (20/25 studies); however, none of the six which tested multiple algorithms identified it as highest performing algorithm. The effect of various study design characteristics on performance was evaluated in order to provide context to the limitations of highly performing models. Models used a variety of constructs, which affected both their performance and their viability for implementation in routine practice. Consultation with stakeholders is necessary to identify priorities for model refinement and to create a benchmark of acceptable performance for implementation in clinical practice.<br/><br/><strong>Keywords:</strong> clinical decision support, machine learning, prediction modelling, asthma exacerbation, systematic review<br/>","PeriodicalId":15079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asthma and Allergy","volume":"2010 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primary Care Asthma Attack Prediction Models for Adults: A Systematic Review of Reported Methodologies and Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Lijun Ma, Holly Tibble\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/jaa.s445450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<strong>Abstract:</strong> Prognostic models hold great potential for predicting asthma exacerbations, providing opportunities for early intervention, and are a popular area of current research. However, it is unclear how models should be compared and contrasted, given their differences in both design and performance, particularly with a view to potential implementation in routine practice. This systematic review aimed to identify novel predictive models of asthma attacks in adults and compare differences in construction related to populations, outcome definitions, prediction time horizons, algorithms, validation, and performance estimation. Twenty-five studies were identified for comparison, with varying definitions of asthma attacks and prediction event time horizons ranging from 15 days to 30 months. The most commonly used algorithm was logistic regression (20/25 studies); however, none of the six which tested multiple algorithms identified it as highest performing algorithm. The effect of various study design characteristics on performance was evaluated in order to provide context to the limitations of highly performing models. Models used a variety of constructs, which affected both their performance and their viability for implementation in routine practice. Consultation with stakeholders is necessary to identify priorities for model refinement and to create a benchmark of acceptable performance for implementation in clinical practice.<br/><br/><strong>Keywords:</strong> clinical decision support, machine learning, prediction modelling, asthma exacerbation, systematic review<br/>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Asthma and Allergy\",\"volume\":\"2010 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Asthma and Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/jaa.s445450\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asthma and Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/jaa.s445450","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:预后模型在预测哮喘恶化、提供早期干预机会方面具有巨大潜力,是当前研究的热门领域。然而,鉴于模型在设计和性能上的差异,特别是考虑到在常规实践中的潜在应用,如何对模型进行比较和对比尚不明确。本系统综述旨在确定成人哮喘发作的新型预测模型,并比较与人群、结果定义、预测时间范围、算法、验证和性能评估相关的构建差异。我们确定了 25 项研究进行比较,这些研究对哮喘发作的定义各不相同,预测事件的时间跨度从 15 天到 30 个月不等。最常用的算法是逻辑回归(20/25 项研究);然而,在对多种算法进行测试的六项研究中,没有一项研究将逻辑回归确定为性能最高的算法。我们评估了各种研究设计特征对性能的影响,以便为高性能模型的局限性提供背景资料。这些模型使用了多种结构,这既影响了它们的性能,也影响了它们在常规实践中实施的可行性。有必要与利益相关者进行协商,以确定完善模型的优先事项,并为在临床实践中的应用建立一个可接受的性能基准。 关键词:临床决策支持;机器学习;预测建模;哮喘加重;系统综述
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Primary Care Asthma Attack Prediction Models for Adults: A Systematic Review of Reported Methodologies and Outcomes
Abstract: Prognostic models hold great potential for predicting asthma exacerbations, providing opportunities for early intervention, and are a popular area of current research. However, it is unclear how models should be compared and contrasted, given their differences in both design and performance, particularly with a view to potential implementation in routine practice. This systematic review aimed to identify novel predictive models of asthma attacks in adults and compare differences in construction related to populations, outcome definitions, prediction time horizons, algorithms, validation, and performance estimation. Twenty-five studies were identified for comparison, with varying definitions of asthma attacks and prediction event time horizons ranging from 15 days to 30 months. The most commonly used algorithm was logistic regression (20/25 studies); however, none of the six which tested multiple algorithms identified it as highest performing algorithm. The effect of various study design characteristics on performance was evaluated in order to provide context to the limitations of highly performing models. Models used a variety of constructs, which affected both their performance and their viability for implementation in routine practice. Consultation with stakeholders is necessary to identify priorities for model refinement and to create a benchmark of acceptable performance for implementation in clinical practice.

Keywords: clinical decision support, machine learning, prediction modelling, asthma exacerbation, systematic review
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Asthma and Allergy
Journal of Asthma and Allergy Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
185
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: An international, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, reports, editorials and commentaries on the following topics: Asthma; Pulmonary physiology; Asthma related clinical health; Clinical immunology and the immunological basis of disease; Pharmacological interventions and new therapies. Although the main focus of the journal will be to publish research and clinical results in humans, preclinical, animal and in vitro studies will be published where they shed light on disease processes and potential new therapies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信