SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Gordon Forbes

Publications and source records attributed to Gordon Forbes.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Adaptive Gaussian Process Search for Simulation-Based Sample Size Estimation in Clinical Prediction Models: Validation of the pmsims R Package

Background: Determining an adequate sample size is essential for developing reliable and generalisable clinical prediction models, yet practical guidance on selecting appropriate methods remains limited. Existing analytical and simulation-based approaches often rely on restrictive assumptions and focus on mean-based criteria. We present and validate pmsims, an R package that uses Gaussian process surrogate modelling to provide a flexible and computationally efficient simulation-based framework for sample size determination across diverse prediction settings. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive simulation study with two aims. First, we compared three search engines implemented in pmsims: a Gaussian process-based adaptive method, a deterministic bisection method, and a hybrid approach, across binary, continuous, and survival outcomes. Second, we benchmarked the best-performing pmsims engine against existing analytical (pmsampsize) and simulation-based (samplesizedev) methods, evaluating recommended sample sizes, computational time, and achieved performance on large independent validation datasets. Results: The Gaussian process-based method consistently produced the most stable sample size estimates, particularly in low-signal, high-dimensional settings. In benchmarking, pmsims achieved performance close to prespecified targets across all outcome types, matching simulation-based approaches and outperforming analytical methods in more challenging scenarios. Conclusions: pmsims provides an efficient and flexible framework for principled sample size planning in clinical prediction modelling, requiring fewer model evaluations than non-adaptive simulation approaches.

stat.CO

Sample Size Calculations for Developing Clinical Prediction Models: Overview and pmsims R package

Background: Clinical prediction models are increasingly used to inform healthcare decisions, but determining the minimum sample size for their development remains a critical and unresolved challenge. Inadequate sample sizes can lead to overfitting, poor generalisability, and biased predictions. Existing approaches, such as heuristic rules, closed-form formulas, and simulation-based methods, vary in flexibility and accuracy, particularly for complex data structures and machine learning models. Methods: We review current methodologies for sample size estimation in prediction modelling and introduce a conceptual framework that distinguishes between mean-based and assurance-based criteria. Building on this, we propose a novel simulation-based approach that integrates learning curves, Gaussian Process optimisation, and assurance principles to identify sample sizes that achieve target performance with high probability. This approach is implemented in pmsims, an open-source, model-agnostic R package. Results: Through case studies, we demonstrate that sample size estimates vary substantially across methods, performance metrics, and modelling strategies. Compared to existing tools, pmsims provides flexible, efficient, and interpretable solutions that accommodate diverse models and user-defined metrics while explicitly accounting for variability in model performance. Conclusions: Our framework and software advance sample size methodology for clinical prediction modelling by combining flexibility with computational efficiency. Future work should extend these methods to hierarchical and multimodal data, incorporate fairness and stability metrics, and address challenges such as missing data and complex dependency structures.

cs.LG

How to design a pre-specified statistical analysis approach to limit p-hacking in clinical trials: the Pre-SPEC framework

Results from clinical trials can be susceptible to bias if investigators choose their analysis approach after seeing trial data, as this can allow them to perform multiple analyses and then choose the method that provides the most favourable result (commonly referred to as 'p-hacking'). Pre-specification of the planned analysis approach is essential to help reduce such bias, as it ensures analytical methods are chosen in advance of seeing the trial data. However, pre-specification is only effective if done in a way that does not allow p-hacking. For example, investigators may pre-specify a certain statistical method such as multiple imputation, but give little detail on how it will be implemented. Because there are many different ways to perform multiple imputation, this approach to pre-specification is ineffective, as it still allows investigators to analyse the data in different ways before deciding on a final approach. In this article we describe a five-point framework (the Pre-SPEC framework) for designing a pre-specified analysis approach that does not allow p-hacking. This framework is intended to be used in conjunction with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) statement and other similar guidelines to help investigators design the statistical analysis strategy for the trial's primary outcome in the trial protocol.

stat.ME