Journal
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE
Volume 35, Issue 2, Pages 214-226Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6787
Keywords
prognostic model; sample size; external validation
Categories
Funding
- Medical Research Council [G1100513]
- Medical Research Council Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) Partnership [G0902393/99558]
- MRC [G0902393, G1100513] Funding Source: UKRI
- Cancer Research UK [16895] Funding Source: researchfish
- Medical Research Council [G0902393, G1100513] Funding Source: researchfish
- National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0513-10131] Funding Source: researchfish
Ask authors/readers for more resources
After developing a prognostic model, it is essential to evaluate the performance of the model in samples independent from those used to develop the model, which is often referred to as external validation. However, despite its importance, very little is known about the sample size requirements for conducting an external validation. Using a large real data set and resampling methods, we investigate the impact of sample size on the performance of six published prognostic models. Focussing on unbiased and precise estimation of performance measures (e.g. the c-index, D statistic and calibration), we provide guidance on sample size for investigators designing an external validation study. Our study suggests that externally validating a prognostic model requires a minimum of 100 events and ideally 200 (or more) events. (C) 2015 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available