Abstract:BACKGROUND: The ability to predict risk allows healthcare providers to propose which patients might benefit most from certain therapies, and is relevant to payers' demands to justify clinical and economic value. To understand the robustness of risk prediction models for heart failure (HF), we conducted a systematic literature review to (1) identify HF risk-prediction models, (2) assess statistical approach and extent of validation, (3) identify common variables, and (4) assess risk of bias (ROB).METHODS: Literature databases were searched from March 2013 to May 2018 to identify risk prediction models conducted in an out-of-hospital setting in adults with HF. Distinct risk prediction variables were ranked according to outcomes assessed and incorporation into the studies. ROB was assessed using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST).RESULTS: Of 4720 non-duplicated citations, 40 risk-prediction publications were deemed relevant. Within the 40 publications, 58 models assessed 55 (co)primary outcomes, including all-cause mortality (n = 17), cardiovascular death (n = 9), HF hospitalizations (n = 15), and composite endpoints (n = 14). Few publications reported detail on handling missing data (n = 11; 28%). The discriminatory ability for predicting all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and composite endpoints was generally better than for HF hospitalization. 105 distinct predictor variables were identified. Predictors included in >5 publications were: N-terminal prohormone brain-natriuretic peptide, creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, systolic blood pressure, sodium, NYHA class, left ventricular ejection fraction, heart rate, and characteristics including male sex, diabetes, age, and BMI. Only 11/58 (19%) models had overall low ROB, based on our application of PROBAST. In total, 26/58 (45%) models discussed internal validation, and 14/58 (24%) external validation.CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the 58 identified risk-prediction models for HF present particular concerns according to ROB assessment, mainly due to lack of validation and calibration. The potential utility of novel approaches such as machine learning tools is yet to be determined.REGISTRATION NUMBER: The SLR was registered in Prospero (ID: CRD42018100709).

Methodological guidance for the evaluation and updating of clinical prediction models: a systematic review

A novel lifelong machine learning-based method to eliminate calibration drift in clinical prediction models.

Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 1): from development to external validation

Clinical Prediction Models: Model Development

A closed testing procedure to select an appropriate method for updating prediction models

Clinical Prediction Models: Basic Concepts, Application Scenarios, and Research Strategies

Clinical Prediction Models: Model Validation

Reporting and Methods in Developing Prognostic Prediction Models for Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.

Developing clinical prediction models: a step-by-step guide

Comparison of dynamic updating strategies for clinical prediction models

Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 2): how to undertake an external validation study

TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods

Prediction Models in Prehospital and Emergency Medicine Research: How to Derive and Internally Validate a Clinical Prediction Model

Changes in prediction modelling in biomedicine– do systematic reviews indicate whether there is any trend towards larger data sets and machine learning methods?

When impact trials are not feasible: alternatives to study the impact of prediction models on clinical practice

Clinician perspectives and recommendations regarding design of clinical prediction models for deteriorating patients in acute care

A Clinician's Guide to Understanding Bias in Critical Clinical Prediction Models

Evaluating risk prediction models for adults with heart failure: A systematic literature review

Recommendations for Prediction Models in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Cardiovascular Diseases Are Over-Optimistic: a Global Survey Utilizing a Systematic Literature Search

Dynamic updating of clinical survival prediction models in a changing environment

How to develop, validate, and update clinical prediction models using multinomial logistic regression