Margot I E Slot, Maria F Urquijo Castro, Inge Winter-van Rossum, Hendrika H van Hell, Dominic Dwyer, Paola Dazzan, Arija Maat, Lieuwe De Haan, Benedicto Crespo-Facorro, Birte Y Glenthøj, Stephen M Lawrie, Colm McDonald, Oliver Gruber, Thérèse van Amelsvoort, Celso Arango, Tilo Kircher, Barnaby Nelson, Silvana Galderisi, Mark Weiser, Gabriele Sachs, Matthias Kirschner, W Wolfgang Fleischhacker, Philip McGuire, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, René S Kahn
{"title":"首发精神病后功能预后的多变量预测:EUFEST 和 PSYSCAN 的交叉验证方法。","authors":"Margot I E Slot, Maria F Urquijo Castro, Inge Winter-van Rossum, Hendrika H van Hell, Dominic Dwyer, Paola Dazzan, Arija Maat, Lieuwe De Haan, Benedicto Crespo-Facorro, Birte Y Glenthøj, Stephen M Lawrie, Colm McDonald, Oliver Gruber, Thérèse van Amelsvoort, Celso Arango, Tilo Kircher, Barnaby Nelson, Silvana Galderisi, Mark Weiser, Gabriele Sachs, Matthias Kirschner, W Wolfgang Fleischhacker, Philip McGuire, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, René S Kahn","doi":"10.1038/s41537-024-00505-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several multivariate prognostic models have been published to predict outcomes in patients with first episode psychosis (FEP), but it remains unclear whether those predictions generalize to independent populations. Using a subset of demographic and clinical baseline predictors, we aimed to develop and externally validate different models predicting functional outcome after a FEP in the context of a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder (FES), based on a previously published cross-validation and machine learning pipeline. A crossover validation approach was adopted in two large, international cohorts (EUFEST, n = 338, and the PSYSCAN FES cohort, n = 226). Scores on the Global Assessment of Functioning scale (GAF) at 12 month follow-up were dichotomized to differentiate between poor (GAF current < 65) and good outcome (GAF current ≥ 65). Pooled non-linear support vector machine (SVM) classifiers trained on the separate cohorts identified patients with a poor outcome with cross-validated balanced accuracies (BAC) of 65-66%, but BAC dropped substantially when the models were applied to patients from a different FES cohort (BAC = 50-56%). A leave-site-out analysis on the merged sample yielded better performance (BAC = 72%), highlighting the effect of combining data from different study designs to overcome calibration issues and improve model transportability. In conclusion, our results indicate that validation of prediction models in an independent sample is essential in assessing the true value of the model. Future external validation studies, as well as attempts to harmonize data collection across studies, are recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":74758,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)","volume":"10 1","pages":"89"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11458815/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multivariable prediction of functional outcome after first-episode psychosis: a crossover validation approach in EUFEST and PSYSCAN.\",\"authors\":\"Margot I E Slot, Maria F Urquijo Castro, Inge Winter-van Rossum, Hendrika H van Hell, Dominic Dwyer, Paola Dazzan, Arija Maat, Lieuwe De Haan, Benedicto Crespo-Facorro, Birte Y Glenthøj, Stephen M Lawrie, Colm McDonald, Oliver Gruber, Thérèse van Amelsvoort, Celso Arango, Tilo Kircher, Barnaby Nelson, Silvana Galderisi, Mark Weiser, Gabriele Sachs, Matthias Kirschner, W Wolfgang Fleischhacker, Philip McGuire, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, René S Kahn\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41537-024-00505-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Several multivariate prognostic models have been published to predict outcomes in patients with first episode psychosis (FEP), but it remains unclear whether those predictions generalize to independent populations. Using a subset of demographic and clinical baseline predictors, we aimed to develop and externally validate different models predicting functional outcome after a FEP in the context of a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder (FES), based on a previously published cross-validation and machine learning pipeline. A crossover validation approach was adopted in two large, international cohorts (EUFEST, n = 338, and the PSYSCAN FES cohort, n = 226). Scores on the Global Assessment of Functioning scale (GAF) at 12 month follow-up were dichotomized to differentiate between poor (GAF current < 65) and good outcome (GAF current ≥ 65). Pooled non-linear support vector machine (SVM) classifiers trained on the separate cohorts identified patients with a poor outcome with cross-validated balanced accuracies (BAC) of 65-66%, but BAC dropped substantially when the models were applied to patients from a different FES cohort (BAC = 50-56%). A leave-site-out analysis on the merged sample yielded better performance (BAC = 72%), highlighting the effect of combining data from different study designs to overcome calibration issues and improve model transportability. In conclusion, our results indicate that validation of prediction models in an independent sample is essential in assessing the true value of the model. Future external validation studies, as well as attempts to harmonize data collection across studies, are recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11458815/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"88\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537-024-00505-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537-024-00505-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
已有多个多变量预后模型用于预测首发精神病(FEP)患者的预后,但目前仍不清楚这些预测是否适用于独立人群。我们利用人口统计学和临床基线预测因子子集,以先前发表的交叉验证和机器学习管道为基础,旨在开发并从外部验证不同的模型,以预测精神分裂症谱系障碍(FES)首次发作精神病患者的功能性预后。在两个大型国际队列(EUFEST,n = 338;PSYSCAN FES队列,n = 226)中采用了交叉验证方法。对随访 12 个月的全球功能评估量表(GAF)得分进行二分法,以区分功能差(GAF current
Multivariable prediction of functional outcome after first-episode psychosis: a crossover validation approach in EUFEST and PSYSCAN.
Several multivariate prognostic models have been published to predict outcomes in patients with first episode psychosis (FEP), but it remains unclear whether those predictions generalize to independent populations. Using a subset of demographic and clinical baseline predictors, we aimed to develop and externally validate different models predicting functional outcome after a FEP in the context of a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder (FES), based on a previously published cross-validation and machine learning pipeline. A crossover validation approach was adopted in two large, international cohorts (EUFEST, n = 338, and the PSYSCAN FES cohort, n = 226). Scores on the Global Assessment of Functioning scale (GAF) at 12 month follow-up were dichotomized to differentiate between poor (GAF current < 65) and good outcome (GAF current ≥ 65). Pooled non-linear support vector machine (SVM) classifiers trained on the separate cohorts identified patients with a poor outcome with cross-validated balanced accuracies (BAC) of 65-66%, but BAC dropped substantially when the models were applied to patients from a different FES cohort (BAC = 50-56%). A leave-site-out analysis on the merged sample yielded better performance (BAC = 72%), highlighting the effect of combining data from different study designs to overcome calibration issues and improve model transportability. In conclusion, our results indicate that validation of prediction models in an independent sample is essential in assessing the true value of the model. Future external validation studies, as well as attempts to harmonize data collection across studies, are recommended.