Prediction models for clustered data: comparison of a random intercept and standard regression model

被引:65
作者
Bouwmeester, Walter [1 ]
Twisk, Jos W. R. [2 ]
Kappen, Teus H. [3 ]
van Klei, Wilton A. [3 ]
Moons, Karel G. M. [1 ]
Vergouwe, Yvonne [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Inst Hlth Sci, Dept Methodol & Appl Biostat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Perioperat Care & Emergency Med, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Logistic regression analysis; Prediction model with random intercept; Validation; POSTOPERATIVE NAUSEA; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION; MULTILEVEL; VALIDATION; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2288-13-19
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
100404 [儿少卫生与妇幼保健学];
摘要
Background: When study data are clustered, standard regression analysis is considered inappropriate and analytical techniques for clustered data need to be used. For prediction research in which the interest of predictor effects is on the patient level, random effect regression models are probably preferred over standard regression analysis. It is well known that the random effect parameter estimates and the standard logistic regression parameter estimates are different. Here, we compared random effect and standard logistic regression models for their ability to provide accurate predictions. Methods: Using an empirical study on 1642 surgical patients at risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting, who were treated by one of 19 anesthesiologists (clusters), we developed prognostic models either with standard or random intercept logistic regression. External validity of these models was assessed in new patients from other anesthesiologists. We supported our results with simulation studies using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) of 5%, 15%, or 30%. Standard performance measures and measures adapted for the clustered data structure were estimated. Results: The model developed with random effect analysis showed better discrimination than the standard approach, if the cluster effects were used for risk prediction (standard c-index of 0.69 versus 0.66). In the external validation set, both models showed similar discrimination (standard c-index 0.68 versus 0.67). The simulation study confirmed these results. For datasets with a high ICC (>= 15%), model calibration was only adequate in external subjects, if the used performance measure assumed the same data structure as the model development method: standard calibration measures showed good calibration for the standard developed model, calibration measures adapting the clustered data structure showed good calibration for the prediction model with random intercept. Conclusion: The models with random intercept discriminate better than the standard model only if the cluster effect is used for predictions. The prediction model with random intercept had good calibration within clusters.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]
A simplified risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting -: Conclusions from cross-validations between two centers [J].
Apfel, CC ;
Läärä, E ;
Koivuranta, M ;
Greim, CA ;
Roewer, N .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1999, 91 (03) :693-700
[2]
Public health application comparing multilevel analysis with logistic regression: Immunization coverage among long-term care facility residents [J].
Bardenheier, BH ;
Shefer, A ;
Barker, L ;
Winston, CA ;
Sionean, CK .
ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 15 (10) :749-755
[3]
Bates D., 2010, lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes
[4]
Bouwmeester W., 2012, Prediction models: systematic reviews and clustered study data
[5]
Choosing marginal or random-effects models for longitudinal binaryresponses: Application to self-reported disability among older persons [J].
Carrière I. ;
Bouyer J. .
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2 (1) :1-10
[6]
DiezRoux AV, 1997, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V146, P48, DOI 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009191
[7]
Multilevel modelling of medical data [J].
Goldstein, H ;
Browne, W ;
Rasbash, J .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2002, 21 (21) :3291-3315
[8]
Goldstein H., 2011, MULTILEVEL STAT MODE
[9]
Multilevel modeling for binary data [J].
Guo, G ;
Zhao, HX .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, 2000, 26 :441-462
[10]
Harrell F, 2009, DESIGN 0918