Systematic reviews of prognostic studies IV: meta-analysis of prognostic studies using individual participant data

Workshop category: 

  • Statistical methods
Date and Location

Date: 

Tuesday 18 September 2018 - 11:00 to 12:30

Location: 

Contact persons and facilitators

Contact person:

Facilitators:

Debray T1, Damen J2, Riley R3
1 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Netherlands
2 Cochrane Netherlands, Netherlands
3 Prognosis Methods Group, United Kingdom

Acknowledgements:

Riley R1, Cochrane IPD Methods group 2, Cochrane Prognosis Methods Group 2
1 Keele University, United Kingdom
2 , UK
Target audience

Target audience: 

Reviewers with an interest in meta-analysis in risk prediction research

Level of difficulty: 

Intermediate
Type of workshop

Type of workshop : 

Training
Abstract

Abstract:

Background:
The development and validation of prediction models is an important area in contemporary medical research. Over the past few years, evidence synthesis and meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) has become increasingly popular, not only for intervention research but also for improving the development, validation and generalisability of prediction models. IPD meta-analyses (IPD-MA) provide unique opportunities to better develop and enhance the applicability of prediction models across (sub)populations and settings. There is, however, little guidance on how to conduct an IPD-MA aimed at developing and validating diagnostic and prognostic prediction models, and how to interpret the findings.

Objectives:
This workshop introduces IPD meta-analysis in risk prediction research and the required statistical methodology. We will illustrate the implementation of IPD meta-analysis using case studies and example papers.

Description:
We will discuss how IPD-MA aimed at developing and validating prediction models differ from IPD-MA for assessing treatment effects. We will identify key advantages and challenges in IPD-MA of prediction models. We will provide recommendations for the design of such IPD-MA including the selection of relevant studies. We will discuss statistical methods for handling between-study heterogeneity and other issues regarding prediction model development and validation. We will illustrate this using various empirical examples across medical disciplines.
Attachments

Attachments: 

Relevance to patients and consumers: 

The methods described in our workshop aim to improve the validity and generalizability of risk prediction models. These models are commonly used by health care providers to inform medical decision making. By close collaboration with clinicians and epidemiologists, we were able to identify critical gaps in contemporary prognosis studies, and to apply the proposed methodology in relevant examples.