The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
External validation of a prognostic model to improve prediction of psychosis: a retrospective cohort study in primary care.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sullivan Sarah A, Morris Richard, Kounali Daphne, Kessler David, Hamilton Willie, Lewis Glyn, Lilford Philippa, Nazareth Irwin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Early detection could reduce the duration of untreated psychosis. GPs are a vital part of the psychosis care pathway, but find it difficult to detect the early features. An accurate risk prediction tool, P Risk, was developed to detect these.
AIM: To externally validate P Risk.
DESIGN AND SETTING: This retrospective cohort study used a validation dataset of 1 647 934 UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) primary care records linked to secondary care records.
METHOD: The same predictors (age; sex; ethnicity; social deprivation; consultations for suicidal behaviour, depression/anxiety, and substance misuse; history of consultations for suicidal behaviour; smoking history; substance misuse; prescribed medications for depression/anxiety/post-traumatic stress disorder/obsessive compulsive disorder; and total number of consultations) were used as for the development of P Risk. Predictive risk, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated for various risk thresholds. Discrimination (Harrell's C-index) and calibration were calculated. Results were compared between the development (CPRD GOLD) and validation (CPRD Aurum) datasets.
RESULTS: Psychosis risk increased with values of the P Risk prognostic index. Incidence was highest in younger age groups and, in the main, higher in males. Harrell's C was 0.79 (95% confidence interval = 0.78 to 0.79) in the validation dataset and 0.77 in the development dataset. A risk threshold of 1.0% gave sensitivity of 65.9% and specificity of 86.6%.
CONCLUSION: Further testing is required, but P Risk has the potential to be used in primary care to detect future risk of psychosis.
AIM: To externally validate P Risk.
DESIGN AND SETTING: This retrospective cohort study used a validation dataset of 1 647 934 UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) primary care records linked to secondary care records.
METHOD: The same predictors (age; sex; ethnicity; social deprivation; consultations for suicidal behaviour, depression/anxiety, and substance misuse; history of consultations for suicidal behaviour; smoking history; substance misuse; prescribed medications for depression/anxiety/post-traumatic stress disorder/obsessive compulsive disorder; and total number of consultations) were used as for the development of P Risk. Predictive risk, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated for various risk thresholds. Discrimination (Harrell's C-index) and calibration were calculated. Results were compared between the development (CPRD GOLD) and validation (CPRD Aurum) datasets.
RESULTS: Psychosis risk increased with values of the P Risk prognostic index. Incidence was highest in younger age groups and, in the main, higher in males. Harrell's C was 0.79 (95% confidence interval = 0.78 to 0.79) in the validation dataset and 0.77 in the development dataset. A risk threshold of 1.0% gave sensitivity of 65.9% and specificity of 86.6%.
CONCLUSION: Further testing is required, but P Risk has the potential to be used in primary care to detect future risk of psychosis.