Estimating uncertainty when providing individual cardiovascular risk predictions: a Bayesian survival analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Hageman, Steven H. J. [1 ]
Post, Richard A. J. [2 ]
Visseren, Frank L. J. [1 ]
Mcevoy, J. William [3 ,4 ]
Jukema, J. Wouter [5 ,6 ]
Smulders, Yvo [7 ]
van Smeden, Maarten [8 ]
Dorresteijn, Jannick A. N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Vasc Med, POB 85500, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Eindhoven Univ Technol, Dept Math & Comp Sci, Eindhoven, Netherlands
[3] Univ Galway, Galway, Ireland
[4] Natl Inst Prevent & Cardiovasc Hlth, Galway, Ireland
[5] Leiden Univ Med Ctr, Dept Cardiol, Leiden, Netherlands
[6] Netherlands Heart Inst, Utrecht, Netherlands
[7] Amsterdam UMC, Internal Med, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[8] Univ Utrecht, Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Risk prediction; Cardiovascular; Uncertainty; Bayesian; CI; Credible interval; DISEASE; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111464
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scores provide point estimates of individual risk without uncertainty quantification. The objective of the current study was to demonstrate the feasibility and clinical utility of calculating uncertainty surrounding individual CVD-risk predictions using Bayesian methods. Study Design and Setting: Individuals with established atherosclerotic CVD were included from the Utrecht Cardiovascular CohortdSecondary d Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART). In 8,355 individuals, followed for median of 8.2 years (IQR 4.2e12.5), e 12.5), a Bayesian Weibull model was derived to predict the 10-year risk of recurrent CVD events. Results: Model coefficients and individual predictions from the Bayesian model were very similar to that of a traditional ('frequentist') model but the Bayesian model also predicted 95% credible intervals (CIs) surrounding individual risk estimates. The median width of the individual 95%CrI was 5.3% (IQR 3.6e6.5) e 6.5) and 17% of the population had a 95%CrI width of 10% or greater. The uncertainty decreased with increasing sample size used for derivation of the model. Combining the Bayesian Weibull model with sampled hazard ratios based on trial reports may be used to estimate individual estimates of absolute risk reduction with uncertainty measures and the probability that a treatment option will result in a clinically relevant risk reduction. Conclusion: Estimating uncertainty surrounding individual CVD risk predictions using Bayesian methods is feasible. The uncertainty regarding individual risk predictions could have several applications in clinical practice, like the comparison of different treatment options or by calculating the probability of the individual risk being below a certain treatment threshold. However, as the individual uncertainty measures only reflect sampling error and no biases in risk prediction, physicians should be familiar with the interpretation before widespread clinical adaption. (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Bayesian Analysis for Uncertainty and Risk in a Groundwater Numerical Model's Predictions
    Wu, Ji-Chun
    Lu, Le
    Tang, Tian
    HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT, 2011, 17 (06): : 1310 - 1331
  • [2] Estimating the uncertainty of individual artificial neural net ensemble predictions
    Clark, Robert D.
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2011, 242
  • [3] Bayesian Individual Dynamic Predictions with Uncertainty of Longitudinal Biomarkers and Risks of Survival Events in a Joint Modelling Framework: a Comparison Between Stan, Monolix, and NONMEM
    Riglet, Francois
    Mentre, France
    Veyrat-Follet, Christine
    Bertrand, Julie
    AAPS JOURNAL, 2020, 22 (02):
  • [4] Bayesian Individual Dynamic Predictions with Uncertainty of Longitudinal Biomarkers and Risks of Survival Events in a Joint Modelling Framework: a Comparison Between Stan, Monolix, and NONMEM
    François Riglet
    France Mentre
    Christine Veyrat-Follet
    Julie Bertrand
    The AAPS Journal, 22
  • [5] Considering information uncertainty when assessing risk in Bayesian Belief Network
    Gagarin, Yu E.
    Nikitenko, U., V
    Stepovich, M. A.
    APPLIED MATHEMATICS, COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE AND MECHANICS: CURRENT PROBLEMS, 2020, 1479
  • [6] Uncertainty Analysis of Height Predictions for Young Pinus tabulaeformis Using a Bayesian Approach
    Wang B.
    Tian X.
    Cao T.
    Linye Kexue/Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2020, 56 (11): : 73 - 86
  • [7] Classifier Risk Analysis under Bayesian Uncertainty Models
    Dalton, Lori A.
    2013 ASILOMAR CONFERENCE ON SIGNALS, SYSTEMS AND COMPUTERS, 2013, : 1395 - 1399
  • [8] Uncertainty Quantification in Imaging: When Convex Optimization Meets Bayesian Analysis
    Repetti, Audrey
    Pereyra, Marcelo
    Wiaux, Yves
    2018 26TH EUROPEAN SIGNAL PROCESSING CONFERENCE (EUSIPCO), 2018, : 2668 - 2672
  • [9] MODELING UNCERTAINTY IN INDIVIDUAL PREDICTIONS OF COGNITIVE FUNCTIONING FOR UNTREATED GLIOMA PATIENTS USING BAYESIAN REGRESSION AND CLINICAL VARIABLES
    Boelders, S. M.
    Nicenboim, B.
    Postma, E. O.
    Ong, L. S.
    Gehring, K.
    NEURO-ONCOLOGY, 2024, 26 : V60 - V60
  • [10] Sensitivity analysis, Monte Carlo risk analysis, and Bayesian uncertainty assessment
    Greenland, S
    RISK ANALYSIS, 2001, 21 (04) : 579 - 583