癌症模拟模型标定方法综述

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Medical Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-11 DOI:10.1177/0272989X251353211
Yichi Zhang, Nicole Lipa, Oguzhan Alagoz
{"title":"癌症模拟模型标定方法综述","authors":"Yichi Zhang, Nicole Lipa, Oguzhan Alagoz","doi":"10.1177/0272989X251353211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction.</b> Calibration, a critical step in the development of simulation models, involves adjusting unobservable parameters to ensure that the outcomes of the model closely align with observed target data. This process is particularly vital in cancer simulation models with a natural history component, where direct data to inform natural history parameters are rarely available. <b>Methods.</b> We conducted a scoping review of studies published from 1980 to August 11, 2024, using keyword searches in PubMed and Web of Science. Eligible studies included cancer simulation models with a natural history component that used calibration methods for parameter estimation. <b>Results.</b> A total of 117 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nearly all studies (<i>n</i> = 115) specified calibration targets, while most studies (<i>n</i> = 91) described the parameter search algorithms used. Goodness-of-fit metrics (<i>n</i> = 87), acceptance criteria (<i>n</i> = 53), and stopping rule (<i>n</i> = 46) were reported less frequently. The most commonly used calibration targets were incidence, mortality, and prevalence, typically drawn from cancer registries and observational studies. Mean squared error was the most commonly used goodness-of-fit measure. Random search was the predominant method for parameter search, followed by the Bayesian approach and the Nelder-Mead method. <b>Discussion.</b> Despite recent advances in machine learning, such algorithms remain underutilized in the calibration of cancer simulation models. Further research is needed to compare the efficiency of different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.HighlightsThis work reviewed the literature of cancer simulation models with a natural history component and identified the calibration approaches used in these models with respect to the following attributes: cancer type, calibration target data source, calibration target type, goodness-of-fit metrics, search algorithms, acceptance criteria, stopping rule, computational time, modeling approach, and model stochasticity.Random search has been the predominant method for parameter search, followed by Bayesian approach and Nelder-Mead method.Machine learning-based algorithms, despite their fast advancement in the recent decade, have been underutilized in the cancer simulation models. Furthermore, more research is needed to compare different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"965-975"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12346156/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.\",\"authors\":\"Yichi Zhang, Nicole Lipa, Oguzhan Alagoz\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0272989X251353211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Introduction.</b> Calibration, a critical step in the development of simulation models, involves adjusting unobservable parameters to ensure that the outcomes of the model closely align with observed target data. This process is particularly vital in cancer simulation models with a natural history component, where direct data to inform natural history parameters are rarely available. <b>Methods.</b> We conducted a scoping review of studies published from 1980 to August 11, 2024, using keyword searches in PubMed and Web of Science. Eligible studies included cancer simulation models with a natural history component that used calibration methods for parameter estimation. <b>Results.</b> A total of 117 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nearly all studies (<i>n</i> = 115) specified calibration targets, while most studies (<i>n</i> = 91) described the parameter search algorithms used. Goodness-of-fit metrics (<i>n</i> = 87), acceptance criteria (<i>n</i> = 53), and stopping rule (<i>n</i> = 46) were reported less frequently. The most commonly used calibration targets were incidence, mortality, and prevalence, typically drawn from cancer registries and observational studies. Mean squared error was the most commonly used goodness-of-fit measure. Random search was the predominant method for parameter search, followed by the Bayesian approach and the Nelder-Mead method. <b>Discussion.</b> Despite recent advances in machine learning, such algorithms remain underutilized in the calibration of cancer simulation models. Further research is needed to compare the efficiency of different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.HighlightsThis work reviewed the literature of cancer simulation models with a natural history component and identified the calibration approaches used in these models with respect to the following attributes: cancer type, calibration target data source, calibration target type, goodness-of-fit metrics, search algorithms, acceptance criteria, stopping rule, computational time, modeling approach, and model stochasticity.Random search has been the predominant method for parameter search, followed by Bayesian approach and Nelder-Mead method.Machine learning-based algorithms, despite their fast advancement in the recent decade, have been underutilized in the cancer simulation models. Furthermore, more research is needed to compare different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"965-975\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12346156/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X251353211\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X251353211","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

介绍。校准是开发仿真模型的关键步骤,包括调整不可观测参数,以确保模型的结果与观测到的目标数据紧密一致。这个过程在具有自然历史成分的癌症模拟模型中尤其重要,因为很少有直接数据来告知自然历史参数。方法。我们对1980年至2024年8月11日发表的研究进行了范围审查,使用PubMed和Web of Science的关键字搜索。符合条件的研究包括使用校准方法进行参数估计的自然历史成分的癌症模拟模型。结果。共有117项研究符合纳入标准。几乎所有的研究(n = 115)都指定了校准目标,而大多数研究(n = 91)描述了所使用的参数搜索算法。拟合优度指标(n = 87)、接受标准(n = 53)和停止规则(n = 46)的报告频率较低。最常用的校准目标是发病率、死亡率和患病率,通常来自癌症登记和观察性研究。均方误差是最常用的拟合优度度量。随机搜索是参数搜索的主要方法,其次是贝叶斯方法和Nelder-Mead方法。讨论。尽管最近在机器学习方面取得了进展,但这种算法在癌症模拟模型的校准中仍未得到充分利用。需要进一步的研究来比较不同的参数搜索算法用于标定的效率。本工作回顾了具有自然历史成分的癌症模拟模型的文献,并根据以下属性确定了这些模型中使用的校准方法:癌症类型、校准目标数据源、校准目标类型、拟合优度指标、搜索算法、接受标准、停止规则、计算时间、建模方法和模型随机性。随机搜索是参数搜索的主要方法,其次是贝叶斯方法和Nelder-Mead方法。基于机器学习的算法,尽管近十年来发展迅速,但在癌症模拟模型中尚未得到充分利用。此外,还需要更多的研究来比较不同的参数搜索算法用于校准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.

Introduction. Calibration, a critical step in the development of simulation models, involves adjusting unobservable parameters to ensure that the outcomes of the model closely align with observed target data. This process is particularly vital in cancer simulation models with a natural history component, where direct data to inform natural history parameters are rarely available. Methods. We conducted a scoping review of studies published from 1980 to August 11, 2024, using keyword searches in PubMed and Web of Science. Eligible studies included cancer simulation models with a natural history component that used calibration methods for parameter estimation. Results. A total of 117 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nearly all studies (n = 115) specified calibration targets, while most studies (n = 91) described the parameter search algorithms used. Goodness-of-fit metrics (n = 87), acceptance criteria (n = 53), and stopping rule (n = 46) were reported less frequently. The most commonly used calibration targets were incidence, mortality, and prevalence, typically drawn from cancer registries and observational studies. Mean squared error was the most commonly used goodness-of-fit measure. Random search was the predominant method for parameter search, followed by the Bayesian approach and the Nelder-Mead method. Discussion. Despite recent advances in machine learning, such algorithms remain underutilized in the calibration of cancer simulation models. Further research is needed to compare the efficiency of different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.HighlightsThis work reviewed the literature of cancer simulation models with a natural history component and identified the calibration approaches used in these models with respect to the following attributes: cancer type, calibration target data source, calibration target type, goodness-of-fit metrics, search algorithms, acceptance criteria, stopping rule, computational time, modeling approach, and model stochasticity.Random search has been the predominant method for parameter search, followed by Bayesian approach and Nelder-Mead method.Machine learning-based algorithms, despite their fast advancement in the recent decade, have been underutilized in the cancer simulation models. Furthermore, more research is needed to compare different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.

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
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信