Abstract
This literature review had two objectives: to identify models for predicting the risk of coronary heart diseases in patients with diabetes (DM); and to assess model quality in terms of risk of bias (RoB) and applicability for the purpose of health technology assessment (HTA). We undertook a targeted review of journal articles published in English, Dutch, Chinese, or Spanish in 5 databases from 1st January 2016 to 18th December 2022, and searched three systematic reviews for the models published after 2012. We used PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool) to assess RoB, and used findings from Betts et al. 2019, which summarized recommendations and criticisms of HTA agencies on cardiovascular risk prediction models, to assess model applicability for the purpose of HTA. As a result, 71 % and 67 % models reporting C-index showed good discrimination abilities (C-index >= 0.7). Of the 26 model studies and 30 models identified, only one model study showed low RoB in all domains, and no model was fully applicable for HTA. Since the major cause of high RoB is inappropriate use of analysis method, we advise clinicians to carefully examine the model performance declared by model developers, and to trust a model if all PROBAST domains except analysis show low RoB and at least one validation study conducted in the same setting (e.g. country) is available. Moreover, since general model applicability is not informative for HTA, novel adapted tools may need to be developed.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 111574 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice |
| Volume | 209 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Mar 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2024 The Authors
Funding
We found that the concerns regarding model applicability for HTA cannot be simply addressed by the assessment of generic applicability. As mentioned by PROBAST, the generic applicability considers the extent to which the population, outcome, and definition and assessment of predictors match a review question. However, the generic applicability doesn't imply much regarding how to develop a model with wide applicability, as the PROBAST could not expect what review questions can be imposed by the HTA stakeholders. Consequently, the model users might only select and apply the least unsatisfactory model, while losing the opportunity of acquiring a perfect one. One solution for this applicability concern is to account for needs of HTA stakeholders in appraisal tools. This could be achieved by adapting existing appraisal tools or developing new tools. However, given the various needs of model users, innovating an one-size-fits-all appraisal tool which defines an one-size-fits-all risk prediction model may not be feasible. Therefore, to account for various needs, we recommend closer collaboration among model developers, tool developers, and HTA stakeholders, and suggest the involvement of all stakeholders in development and implementation of appraisal tools. Hence, the aim of our study was to identify the prognostic risk prediction models developed recently with statistical or machine learning techniques, and to assess their RoB and applicability for HTA. This research was performed as part of the HTx project [27] . The project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 825162.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Horizon 2020 Framework Programme | 825162 |
| Horizon 2020 Framework Programme | |
| Health Technology Assessment Programme |
Keywords
- Coronary heart disease
- Diabetes
- Health technology assessment
- Risk prediction model
- Systematic review