Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Comparison of Differences in Cohort (Forward) and Case Control (Backward) Methodologic Approaches for Validation of
Simon J Davies1, Daniel I Sessler2, Zhongping Jian3
1Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, York, United Kingdom; and Centre for Health and Population Science, Hull York Medical School, York, United Kingdom.
Background:
The Hypotension Prediction Index (the index) software is a machine learning algorithm that detects physiologic changes that may lead to hypotension. The original validation used a case control (backward) analysis that has been suggested to be biased. This study therefore conducted a cohort (forward) analysis and compared this to the original validation technique.
Methods:
A retrospective analysis of data from previously reported studies was conducted. All data were analyzed identically with two different methodologies, and receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed. Both backward and forward analyses were performed to examine differences in area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the Hypotension Prediction Index and other hemodynamic variables to predict a mean arterial pressure (MAP) less than 65 mmHg for at least 1 min 5, 10, and 15 min in advance.
Results:
The analysis included 2,022 patients, yielding 4,152,124 measurements taken at 20-s intervals. The area under the curve for the index predicting hypotension analyzed by backward and forward methodologies respectively was 0.957 (95% CI, 0.947 to 0.964) versus 0.923 (95% CI, 0.912 to 0.933) 5 min in advance, 0.933 (95% CI, 0.924 to 0.942) versus 0.923 (95% CI, 0.911 to 0.933) 10 min in advance, and 0.929 (95% CI, 0.918 to 0.938) versus 0.926 (95% CI, 0.914 to 0.937) 15 min in advance. No variable other than MAP had an area under the curve greater than 0.7. The areas under the curve using forward analysis for MAP predicting hypotension 5, 10, and 15 min in advance were 0.932 (95% CI, 0.920 to 0.940), 0.929 (95% CI, 0.918 to 0.938), and 0.932 (95% CI, 0.921 to 0.940), respectively. The R2 for the variation in the index due to MAP was 0.77.
Conclusions:
Using an updated methodology, the study found that the utility of the Hypotension Prediction Index to predict future hypotensive events is high, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve similar to that of the original validation method.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:10Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:30Alterations in Blood Pressure
Hypertension (High blood pressure)
Hypertension occurs when blood pressure readings consistently exceed the normal range. It is diagnosed when systolic blood pressure (the top number, indicating pressure while the heart...
01:28Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.
01:23Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
01:25Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...