SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “External validity”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMed1992

Development of an interview-based geriatric depression rating scale.

The geriatric depression rating scale (GDRS) is a new interview-based depression rating scale designed for use with adults 60 years of age or older. The scale was developed to fill a need for an instrument that would be sensitive to the problems encountered in assessing depression among older adults. The GDRS was designed by using items from the self-report Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) as topic areas in a structured clinical interview similar to that of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD). The 35-item rating scale was administered to 68 older individuals with a range of affective disturbance. The scale was found to have internal consistency and split-half reliability comparable to the HRSD and GDS. Concurrent validity, construct validity, external criterion validity, sensitivity, and specificity were all found to be acceptable.

Aged↗

PubMed1978

A critique of project evaluations.

In recent years an increased stress has been placed on the evaluation of mental health, education, and welfare service programs. The majority of studies readily available to most evaluators represent local project evaluations which usually contain diverse references to different aspects of the evaluative process. For evaluative results to be even minimally useful to other projects, however, certain requirements must be met. These are: (1) internal validity, (2) external validity, (3) specification of the population and treatment being implemented, and (4) standardization of indicators of treatment impact. To determine the extent to which published project impact evaluations meet these criteria, a study was undertaken to "evaluate the evaluations" themselves within heroin addiction treatment programs. Six high-yield journals and 100 random sources were systematically searched for reports of evaluations which provided measures of success in terms of the consumer. Articles were analyzed in regard to our four prerequisites for cross-project comparisons regarding process variables, impact variables, and methodologies. It became clear, however, that our original objectives in evaluating either the usefulness of published project evaluations or testing any specific impact hypotheses were not achievable due to the state of evaluative measurement and reporting practices at this time. The major problems we eoncountered in our inability to complete a necessary and potentially fruitful comparative assessment of project evaluations are discussed in detail with recommendations for future work.

Heroin Dependence↗

PubMed2026

Analysis of end-stage renal disease mediated by cuproptosis-related genes.

OBJECTIVE: The complex pathophysiological mechanism of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has not been fully understood. Cuproptosis is a newly discovered type of programmed cell death. Therefore, this study attempts to clarify the relationship between cuproptosis-related genes (CRGs) and the phenotype of ESRD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Center for Biological Information Gene Expression Omnibus database was applied to obtain the GSE37171 dataset comprising whole-genome microarray analysis of peripheral blood samples. A 3 : 1 case-control design was employed with 75 ESRD patients and 20 healthy controls who were frequency-matched for age, sex, and ethnicity. Based on differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and genes related to cuproptosis, CRGs were identified. Thereafter, we explored two different subpopulations based on the cuproptosis gene and analyzed their expression and immune infiltration. Genes specific to the CRG cluster were identified through the weighted gene co-expression network analysis algorithm, and the best prediction model was determined and verified by four machine learning methods. RESULTS: The study identified 14 differentially expressed CRGs, among which ATP7B, SLC31A1, LIAS, LIPT1, DLD, MTF1, CDKN2A, DBT, and DLST had relatively high expression levels in the ESRD samples. Compared with the control group, expression levels of FDX1, DLAT, PDHA1, PDHB, and GLS were significantly lower in the ESRD group, and CRGs played a key role in the regulation of immune infiltration in ESRD. Two cuproptosis-related molecular clusters were identified in the ESRD samples. Cluster2 was more correlated with the immune infiltration of ESRD. By analyzing the intersection points between CRG cluster and key genes of ESRD, a total of 888 specific DEGs were identified. Functional differences related to specific DEGs were further explored using gene set variation analysis. Five significant genes (SMC5, USP47, USP53, AGA, and DMXL1) were identified by the support vector machine model as key predictors for ESRD disease risk, achieving an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00 in internal validation. However, external validation in independent cohorts is required prior to clinical application. Individual gene analysis showed an AUC > 0.81 in discriminating ESRD patients from healthy controls, and the expression of all 5 genes in ESRD patients was significantly lower than in the control group. CONCLUSION: This study clarified the relationship between CRGs and the phenotype of ESRD, analyzed their specific roles in the immune microenvironment, and obtained a predictive model, providing new insights for the study of its potential therapeutic targets.

Humans↗

PubMed1990

A methodological framework for the design of research on the evaluation of residents.

This paper describes a construct validation framework for research on the selection and evaluation of residents. The application of the proposed methodology to surgery residents is described. The need to measure non-cognitive and neuropsychological factors in addition to cognitive knowledge and technical ability is emphasized, and a research strategy that integrates theory formulation, internal validation, and external validation is presented. In this context, residents' competence is viewed as a multivariate construct that requires validation through longitudinal empirical studies and the use of multivariate statistical approaches.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2026

Could the preoperative urethral curve be used to predict immediate urinary continence following Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? A retrospective multi-center study.

PURPOSE: Immediate urinary continence (UC) recovery following Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) remains highly variable, highlighting the need for reliable preoperative prediction. We aimed to develop and validate models to identify patients likely to achieve immediate UC recovery following RS-RARP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 580 prostate cancer patients who underwent RS-RARP from four medical centers were assigned to a training set (n=348), an internal validation set (n=103) and an external validation set (n=129). Independent predictors were identified through univariate analysis and LASSO regression. A nomogram was constructed using multivariate logistic regression. Its performance was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis. RESULTS: Immediate UC recovery was observed in 84.5% (294/348) of patients in the training cohort, 80.6% (83/103) in the internal validation cohort, and 81.4% (105/129) in the external validation cohort, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified membranous urethral length (MUL) (OR=1.23, P=0.029) and urethral curvature (OR=2.84, P<0.001) as independent predictors, while prostate volume (PV) (OR=0.84, P <0.001) as a protective factor. The nomogram integrating MUL, PV, and urethral curvature demonstrated superior predictive accuracy, with an AUC of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83-0.91) in the training cohort. The bootstrap-corrected calibration slope was 0.96, and the Brier score was 0.08. Calibration curves and decision curve analysis confirmed the predictive accuracy and clinical utility of the nomogram. CONCLUSIONS: Our study introduces a novel quantitative method for assessing urethral curvature. The mpMRI-based model, integrating urethral curvature and prostate spatial configuration, offers enhanced predictive accuracy for postoperative immediate UC recovery.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Diagnostic performance of machine learning models versus established risk stratification for intracranial aneurysm rupture: a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) models have been proposed to improve the discrimination of intracranial aneurysm rupture status beyond established clinical risk stratification tools. However, reported performance is heterogeneous and the relative contribution of model architecture and feature dominance remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis of studies evaluating ML models for intracranial aneurysm rupture discrimination. PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL were searched to February 2026. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using a bivariate random-effects model, with summary receiver operating characteristic curves generated across training, internal testing and external validation datasets. Models were compared with regression-based approaches and Population, Hypertension, Age, Size of aneurysm, Earlier subarachnoid haemorrhage, Site of aneurysm (PHASES) scores. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses explored associations between algorithm family and feature domain. RESULTS: Sixty-two retrospective cohorts (29 709 patients 209 models) met the inclusion criteria. In training datasets, pooled sensitivity and specificity for ML were 0.81 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.85) and 0.83 (0.80-0.86), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.878, exceeding PHASES (AUC 0.667). In testing datasets, ML retained higher discrimination (AUC 0.837) than regression models (0.806) and PHASES (0.646). In external validation, sensitivity was preserved (0.82), but specificity declined (0.66). Deep learning demonstrated the highest AUCs (training and testing). Incorporation of haemodynamic or radiomic features improved pooled discrimination relative to morphology alone. Evidence of small-study effects and mostly unclear Prediction Model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool ratings were observed. CONCLUSIONS: ML approaches demonstrate higher pooled discrimination for aneurysm rupture status than conventional risk scores in retrospective datasets, but reduced external validation specificity and heterogeneity limit confidence for clinical translation. Prospective, externally validated, calibrated models are required before integration into routine cerebrovascular risk stratification.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Prediction of incident heart failure in established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: the SMART2-HF model.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) are at high risk of developing heart failure (HF). However, incident HF is not part of the risk assessment of current guideline-recommended models. The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the SMART2-HF model for prediction of incident HF in patients with ASCVD. METHODS: SMART2-HF was developed in 7698 individuals with established ASCVD (coronary, cerebrovascular, or peripheral artery disease, or abdominal aortic aneurysm) but without prior HF from the UCC-SMART cohort. Cox proportional hazards models including sex-predictor interactions and with age as the time scale were derived to estimate the 10-year and lifetime risk of incident HF (hospitalization for HF or HF-related death), accounting for competing non-HF mortality. Predictors, limited to routinely available clinical characteristics, were aligned with the SMART2 risk model for recurrent cardiovascular (CV) risk in the same population. External validation was performed in 240 741 patients with ASCVD from six data sources: the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, the HUNT3 study, the SWEDEHEART Registry, the ASCVD-Particles cohort, the Estonian Biobank and the international REACH Registry. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 11.2 years (interquartile range 6.1-16.4 years), 1031 incident HF events (13%) occurred in the UCC-SMART cohort. In the external validation data sources, a total of 24 885 incident HF events (10%) occurred. The pooled C-statistic was .696 (95% confidence interval .674-.717), with consistent performance in subgroups by sex and type of ASCVD. Predicted risks matched observed incidence in external validation. CONCLUSIONS: The SMART2-HF model enables the prediction of incident HF in patients with ASCVD. Aligned with the guideline-recommended SMART2 model for recurrent CV risk, SMART2-HF can be used as a complementary tool in this population.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Risk prediction in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the LIFE-Preserved model.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) constitutes a heterogeneous disease with varying prognosis. Given the rising incidence of HFpEF, accurate risk prediction for these patients is needed to identify high-risk individuals, who may benefit the most from preventive treatments. The LIFE-Preserved model was developed and validated for the prediction of individual short-term and lifetime risk for HF hospitalization or cardiovascular (CV) death in patients with HFpEF. METHODS: LIFE-Preserved was derived in 20 332 patients aged 40-90 years with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50% from the Swedish HF Registry. Cause- and sex-specific Cox models were derived to predict the risk of HF hospitalization or CV death using 14 routinely available predictors. Use of age as the timescale allowed for predictions beyond the maximum follow-up duration in the derivation data, adjusted for competing risks. External validation was performed in two trials (EMPEROR-Preserved and TOPCAT-Americas) and three registries (NHS England Secure Data Environment, Veterans Affairs, and HF-Particles). Model performance was assessed by discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 1.8 years (interquartile range .6-4.2, maximum 19 years), 9341 first HF hospitalizations or CV deaths (46%) were observed in Swedish HF Registry. External validation included data from 28 062 patients with HFpEF [9930 (35%) first HF hospitalizations or CV deaths]. Pooled C-statistics were .714 (95% confidence interval .652-.775) in trials and .658 (95% confidence interval .599-.717 in registries, with adequate calibration in all external validation sources. Performance was similar in men and women. An interactive calculator of the LIFE-Preserved model has been made available here. CONCLUSIONS: The LIFE-Preserved model enables prediction of short-term and lifetime risk of HF hospitalization or CV death in patients with HFpEF. The model could serve as a tool to identify high-risk HFpEF patients, guiding clinical management and shared decision-making.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Diagnostic Performance of Machine Learning for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Early and accurate diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and its organ involvement is essential. Previous reviews of machine learning (ML) in SLE combined heterogeneous tasks and validation strategies and may have overinterpreted model performance. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of ML and deep learning (DL) models for 3 clinically distinct SLE-related tasks: SLE classification or diagnosis, lupus nephritis (LN) diagnosis, and neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus (NPSLE) discrimination. We also assessed methodological quality and certainty of evidence. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore were searched from January 2014 to April 2026. Eligible peer-reviewed diagnostic accuracy studies developed or validated ML or DL models for 1 of the 3 prespecified tasks, used an accepted reference standard, and provided data for a 2×2 contingency table. Bivariate random-effects meta-analyses with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment were used to pool sensitivity and specificity. We reported 95% prediction intervals (PIs), assessed risk of bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies for Artificial Intelligence tool (QUADAS-AI; Viknesh Sounderajah [Imperial College London]), and evaluated certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework for diagnostic test accuracy. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included: 17 for SLE classification, 5 for LN diagnosis, and 7 for NPSLE discrimination. In the primary task-stratified analysis, pooled sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.86-0.94; 95% PI 0.56-0.99), and pooled specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.96; 95% PI 0.69-0.99), with low heterogeneity (I²=23.9% and 22.9%, respectively). DL models showed a sensitivity of 0.93 and specificity of 0.95, compared with 0.88 and 0.94 for traditional ML models. Certainty of evidence was high for most analyses but low for LN diagnosis because of inconsistency and imprecision. All studies were retrospective, and only 9 of 29 (31%) performed independent external validation. Overall risk of bias was high or unclear in 22 of 29 (75.9%) studies. No study reported model calibration, decision-curve analysis, or net clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS: ML models showed promising diagnostic accuracy across 3 distinct SLE-related tasks, but wide PIs, limited external validation, and pervasive risk of bias restrict conclusions about real-world generalizability. Prospective multicenter studies with standardized tasks and reference standards, independent external validation, and formal assessment of calibration and clinical utility are required before clinical implementation.

Humans↗

PubMed1991

Who enrolls in prevention trials? Discordance in perception of risk by professionals and participants.

Internal and external validity problems permeate all intervention studies but are accentuated in primary preventive intervention research, particularly when studies target or recruit individuals based on their risk for psychopathology. Since many people who are at risk do not yet experience distress, they may not perceive the need for intervention. Recruitment tactics based on explaining extent of risk are unlikely to be persuasive and may have negative consequences. If respondents are not motivated to participate, a small or biased subset of the target population will participate in the intervention. Bias is of special concern when those enrolled represent only part of the continuum of risk. Selective enrollment may compromise both internal validity (the interpretation of the research results) and external validity (the generalizability of the findings) of intervention trials in primary prevention. This article discusses the effects of partial enrollment and the resultant bias. It suggests several strategies for increasing the enrollment of the target population and examines some of their ethical ramifications. It also stresses the importance of collecting systematic data documenting how the participants in the intervention differ from the target group as a whole.

Bias↗

PubMed1975

Changes in obsessive/compulsive patients as measured by the Leyton Inventory before and after treatment with clomipramine.

The Leyton Obsessional Inventory has been found to be a useful measure in assessing patients before and after treatment with clomipramine. Mean scores for symptoms and interference altered significantly during the course of treatment. The Leyton Obsessional Inventory, however, lacks external validation owing to the absence of some valid alternative quantification. In the absence of such external validation it seems justifiable to use the mean Leyton score diagnostically but not as a sole indication of severity or response to treatment.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

PubMed2026

Machine Learning-Driven Prediction of Coronary Artery Disease Risk Based on UK Biobank Plasma Proteomics.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading global cause of mortality, yet the predictive accuracy of conventional risk models is limited. Here, we integrate conventional risk factors, polygenic risk scores, and large-scale proteomics to develop a unified model for enhanced CAD risk prediction. METHODS: Using data from UK Biobank, participants with plasma proteomics and genetic risk data were included after excluding prevalent CAD. Participants from England were split into training (n=32 330) and internal validation (n=13 857) sets, and Scotland/Wales participants formed an external validation set (n=5775). Incident CAD was ascertained from linked health records. A 202-protein proteomic risk score was derived by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox regression, and CatBoost models were trained using conventional risk factors alone and with incremental addition of polygenic risk scores and protein proteomic risk scores; Shapley Additive Explanations-guided forward selection identified a compact protein panel. RESULTS: Across cohorts, the median age was 58 years and ∼45% were men. Protein proteomic risk score was dose-dependently associated with CAD risk. Compared with conventional risk factors alone, integrating polygenic risk scores and protein proteomic risk scores improved discrimination, with the area under the curve increasing from 0.750 (95% CI, 0.732-0.767) to 0.789 (95% CI, 0.772-0.805) in internal validation and from 0.717 (95% CI, 0.683-0.750) to 0.762 (95% CI, 0.732-0.791) in external validation. A 9-protein panel (GDF15 [growth differentiation factor 15], MMP12 [matrix metalloproteinase 12], NPPB [natriuretic peptide B], PGF [placental growth factor], REN [renin], ADGRG2 [adhesion G-protein coupled receptor], ACE2 [angiotensin-converting enzyme 2], CDCP1 [CUB domain-containing protein 1], CXCL17 [C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 17)]) captured most proteomic predictive information. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that integrating conventional risk factors, polygenic risk scores, and proteomic data improves CAD risk prediction. This study highlights the utility of proteomics in precision cardiovascular medicine and simplified risk stratification tools.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Machine learning-enabled multi-omics discovery of prognostic biomarkers and signaling targets in pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains difficult to subtype using single omics layers. We conducted an exploratory investigation integrating reverse-phase protein array (RPPA) and DNA methylation data from the cancer genome atlas (TCGA)- pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAAD) to assess the feasibility of multi-omics subtyping, alongside a supervised machine learning analysis of a small gene expression omnibus (GEO) transcriptomic cohort (n = 26) to identify candidate diagnostic genes. RPPA-based K-means clustering suggested a weak, possible two-subtype structure (silhouette ≈ 0.16) that remained unassociated with overall survival (log-rank p = 0.113) and lacked independent prognostic value. An independently performed similarity network fusion (SNF) analysis integrating RPPA and methylation data showed low concordance with RPPA-derived subtypes (Adjusted Rand Index (ARI) = 0.014), indicating limited convergence between molecular modalities. Supervised machine learning analysis of the GEO cohort using a fully nested leave-one-out cross-validation pipeline achieved a mean (area under the curve) AUC of 0.896 across four classifiers and identified four-fold-stable candidate genes (ESCO2, COL17A1, BCL2L14, and SOWAHB). However, this gene panel demonstrated limited external validity across two independent PDAC cohorts (log-rank p = 0.438 for both GSE62452 and GSE28735), indicating limited generalizability despite robust internal performance. Collectively, these findings provide limited evidence for a robust, prognostically significant multi-omics subtype or a validated diagnostic gene signature; instead, this study serves as a hypothesis-generating resource and highlights the importance of rigorous cross-validation and independent external validation in small-sample transcriptomic biomarker discovery.

Humans↗

PubMed1992

Analysis of randomized and nonrandomized patients in clinical trials using the comprehensive cohort follow-up study design.

In clinical research, randomized trials are widely accepted as the definitive method of evaluating the efficacy of therapies. The random assignment of patients to their treatment ensures the internal validity of the comparison of new treatments with controls. An assessment of the external validity of trial results can best be achieved by comparing the study population to the population of patients who met the eligibility criteria but did not consent to randomization. A part of the data of the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS), in which coronary artery bypass surgery is compared to conventional medical therapy in patients with coronary artery disease, is used to illustrate a strategy of multivariate analysis of randomized and nonrandomized patients which allows an investigation of both internal and external validity. The method used Cox's proportional hazards regression model with inclusion of covariates for randomization status and corresponding interactions in addition to the usual covariates for treatment and the important prognostic factors.

Cohort Studies↗

PubMed2026

Data-centric, robust, and explainable multimodal deep learning for clinical decision support: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Multimodal deep learning is increasingly proposed for clinical decision support (CDS) under a "data-centric" framing that prioritizes label quality, missing-modality robustness, distribution shift, calibration, and explainability. Prior reviews have examined multimodal medical AI, CDS, and data-centric methods separately, but none address their intersection. We mapped the modalities, fusion strategies, and data-centric and explainability techniques used in this recent literature, quantified how often each is implemented rather than merely mentioned, assessed deployment-relevant evidence (external validation, clinical-outcome measurement, equity), and formally appraised study-level risk of bias. METHODS: Following the PRISMA 2020 statement (PROSPERO CRD420261427815; registered retrospectively), we screened 150 records and included primary, clinical, multimodal studies that applied machine or deep learning to a decision-support task and reported at least one quantitative result. Two reviewers screened and extracted data with consensus adjudication. Each study was coded against pre-specified operational definitions, separating implemented or empirically evaluated techniques from those only mentioned. Study-level risk of bias was assessed with PROBAST + AI. Synthesis was narrative. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met inclusion; 30 (97%) were published between 2024 and 2026, with a median of three modalities (range 2-6), most commonly structured EHR (71%) and imaging (39%). Data-centric techniques were frequently reported (74-84% across label-noise, distribution-shift, calibration, missing-modality and class-imbalance handling; equity 61%). However, external validation was reported in only 4/31 studies (13%), a clinical or provider outcome in 3/31 (10%), and no study reported routine deployment. Overall risk of bias was high in 27/31 studies (87%), driven by the analysis domain. CONCLUSION: Within this recent, self-selected slice of the field, technical robustness and explainability techniques are widely reported but rarely validated out-of-distribution or against clinical outcomes, and the underlying evidence is at high risk of bias. Progress requires external multi-site validation, clinical-outcome measurement, formal bias appraisal, and adherence to AI reporting standards (e.g., TRIPOD + AI) before deployment can be justified.

Deep Learning↗

PubMed2026

Beyond predictive performance: A systematic review and critical methodological appraisal of AI/ML and conventional modelling strategies in breast, colorectal, and pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Predictive modelling for cancer risk, treatment-related complications, and survival is central to precision oncology. Conventional logistic regression (LR) and Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH) regression remain widely used but are limited when modelling nonlinear interactions, high-dimensional imaging features, and multimodal clinical-metabolic predictors. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) methods offer expanded capability through automated feature extraction, ensemble learning, and flexible survival modelling, but the evidence on when AI/ML adds value over conventional models across cancer sites and predictive tasks remains fragmented. OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the methodological performance, validation strategies, and translational limitations of AI/ML models compared with conventional statistical models in published predictive-modelling studies for breast, colorectal, or pancreatic cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between January 2019 and March 2025. Two reviewers independently conducted title-and-abstract screening, full-text eligibility assessment, and PROBAST risk-of-bias assessment. Sixty-five studies (n = 907,567 participants) were narratively synthesised by cancer site, predictive task, model family, comparator, validation strategy, predictor modality, and calibration or explainability reporting. RESULTS: The 65 studies comprised breast cancer (n = 35), colorectal cancer (n = 21), and pancreatic cancer (n = 9). AI/ML superiority over LR and CoxPH was task- and data-dependent. CNN- and U-Net-based models predominated in imaging and body-composition tasks, tree-based ensembles consistently outperformed LR for tabular perioperative complication prediction, and CoxPH remained competitive, and in the largest pancreatic risk study, superior to XGBoost (C-index 0.802 vs 0.723) in well-structured datasets. PROBAST analysis-domain risk was moderate in 54 of 65 studies (83%), driven by limited external validation, sparse calibration reporting (11/65), and few decision-curve analyses (7/65). CONCLUSION: AI/ML adds the most methodological value in imaging-derived feature extraction and nonlinear perioperative prediction, while conventional regression remains preferable in large, structured datasets with linear predictors. Clinical translation requires standardised body-composition definitions, external validation, calibration assessment, decision-curve analysis, and explainability, in line with TRIPOD+AI and CLAIM standards.

Humans↗

PubMed1987

How generalizable are the effects of smoking prevention programs? Refusal skills training and parent messages in a teacher-administered program.

This study investigated both substantive and methodological issues associated with school-based smoking prevention programs. Substantive issues included the efficacy of a refusal skills training curriculum and of parent messages mailed to students' homes. Methodological issues included the effects of assigning classrooms versus entire schools to experimental conditions and determination of the effects of attrition on internal and external validity. Results revealed differential impact for different subgroups of adolescents. The refusal skills program produced lower rates of smoking than the control condition for students who were smokers at the pretreatment assessment but may have produced detrimental effects among males who were nonsmokers at pretest. The provision of parent messages did not affect outcome. Method of assignment (schools versus classrooms) failed to produce significant effects, and attrition did not affect internal validity. However, the above differential findings, as well as the impact of attrition on external validity, raise questions concerning the generalizability of smoking prevention programs.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Interobserver and intraobserver variation: a problem of validity in epidemiologic studies of arterial pressure].

In carrying out blood pressure epidemiologic studies there may be different factors that can affect internal and external validity and thus eliminate the inferential process. As part of the Hypertension and Risk Factors Associated Study conducted in March 1987 in Cuajimalpa de Morelos, Mexico City, 23 nursing students were standardized on the blood pressure auscultatory method using a sound picture and measuring intraobserver and interobserver agreement through intraclass correlation coefficient. Even though initial standardization sessions showed difficulties in the use of instruments and in the reading of blood pressure levels, final K (kappa) values measuring interobserver agreement increased from 0.25 to 0.86. Omega values measuring intraobserver agreement fluctuated between 0.86 and 0.98. This epidemiologic technique is proposed in order to improve internal and external validity of blood pressure studies.

Blood Pressure↗