Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature

• Main Authors: Laura E. Cowley, Daniel M. Farewell, Sabine Maguire, Alison M. Kemp
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2019-08-01
• Series: Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
• Subjects: Clinical prediction rule; Prediction model; Risk model; Model development; Model validation; Impact studies
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41512-019-0060-y

Abstract Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.