Pavlou, Menelaos;
Ambler, Gareth;
Qu, Chen;
Seaman, Shaun R;
White, Ian R;
Omar, Rumana Z;
(2024)
An evaluation of sample size requirements for developing risk prediction models with binary outcomes.
BMC Medical Research Methodology
, 24
, Article 146. 10.1186/s12874-024-02268-5.
Preview |
Text
Evaluation of sample size requirements for risk models - Accepted.pdf - Accepted Version Download (967kB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Risk prediction models are routinely used to assist in clinical decision making. A small sample size for model development can compromise model performance when the model is applied to new patients. For binary outcomes, the calibration slope (CS) and the mean absolute prediction error (MAPE) are two key measures on which sample size calculations for the development of risk models have been based. CS quantifies the degree of model overfitting while MAPE assesses the accuracy of individual predictions. METHODS: Recently, two formulae were proposed to calculate the sample size required, given anticipated features of the development data such as the outcome prevalence and c-statistic, to ensure that the expectation of the CS and MAPE (over repeated samples) in models fitted using MLE will meet prespecified target values. In this article, we use a simulation study to evaluate the performance of these formulae. RESULTS: We found that both formulae work reasonably well when the anticipated model strength is not too high (c-statistic < 0.8), regardless of the outcome prevalence. However, for higher model strengths the CS formula underestimates the sample size substantially. For example, for c-statistic = 0.85 and 0.9, the sample size needed to be increased by at least 50% and 100%, respectively, to meet the target expected CS. On the other hand, the MAPE formula tends to overestimate the sample size for high model strengths. These conclusions were more pronounced for higher prevalence than for lower prevalence. Similar results were drawn when the outcome was time to event with censoring. Given these findings, we propose a simulation-based approach, implemented in the new R package ‘samplesizedev’, to correctly estimate the sample size even for high model strengths. The software can also calculate the variability in CS and MAPE, thus allowing for assessment of model stability. CONCLUSIONS: The calibration and MAPE formulae suggest sample sizes that are generally appropriate for use when the model strength is not too high. However, they tend to be biased for higher model strengths, which are not uncommon in clinical risk prediction studies. On those occasions, our proposed adjustments to the sample size calculations will be relevant.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | An evaluation of sample size requirements for developing risk prediction models with binary outcomes |
| Location: | England |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12874-024-02268-5 |
| Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-024-02268-5 |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
| Keywords: | Sample size, Simulation, Calibration, Discrimination |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Maths and Physical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Inst of Clinical Trials and Methodology UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Maths and Physical Sciences > Dept of Statistical Science UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Inst of Clinical Trials and Methodology > MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10195549 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
