Scinovex
article Open AccessTop 1% cited

Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: PART II ‐ binary and time‐to‐event outcomes

Statistics in Medicine · 2018 · Vol. 38(7) · pp. 1276–1296
Richard D RileyKym I E SnellJoie EnsorDanielle BurkeFrank E. HarrellKarel G.M. MoonsGary S. Collins

Abstract

When designing a study to develop a new prediction model with binary or time-to-event outcomes, researchers should ensure their sample size is adequate in terms of the number of participants (n) and outcome events (E) relative to the number of predictor parameters (p) considered for inclusion. We propose that the minimum values of n and E (and subsequently the minimum number of events per predictor parameter, EPP) should be calculated to meet the following three criteria: (i) small optimism in predictor effect estimates as defined by a global shrinkage factor of ≥0.9, (ii) small absolute difference of ≤ 0.05 in the model's apparent and adjusted Nagelkerke's R<sup>2</sup> , and (iii) precise estimation of the overall risk in the population. Criteria (i) and (ii) aim to reduce overfitting conditional on a chosen p, and require prespecification of the model's anticipated Cox-Snell R<sup>2</sup> , which we show can be obtained from previous studies. The values of n and E that meet all three criteria provides the minimum sample size required for model development. Upon application of our approach, a new diagnostic model for Chagas disease requires an EPP of at least 4.8 and a new prognostic model for recurrent venous thromboembolism requires an EPP of at least 23. This reinforces why rules of thumb (eg, 10 EPP) should be avoided. Researchers might additionally ensure the sample size gives precise estimates of key predictor effects; this is especially important when key categorical predictors have few events in some categories, as this may substantially increase the numbers required.

Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeStatisticsSample size determinationCategorical variableMathematicsEconometricsEvent (particle physics)OverfittingRule of thumbPopulationSample (material)

MeSH terms

Computer SimulationHumansRegression AnalysisTimeMultivariate AnalysisSample Size

Funding

  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
  • NIHR School for Primary Care Research
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Citations
1,065
FWCI
161.67
field-weighted impact
References
61
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
References
A prognostic index in primary breast cancer
British Journal of Cancer · 1982 · 716 citations
Cardiovascular disease risk profiles
American Heart Journal · 1991 · 2,171 citations
A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 1996 · 8,674 citations
The Nottingham prognostic index in primary breast cancer
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · 1992 · 1,067 citations
Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife
The Annals of Statistics · 1979 · 17,226 citations
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.