Validity external

The Stroke-Thrombolytic Predictive Instrument (Stroke-TPI) has recently been developed in order to provide patient-specific estimates of the probability of a more favorable outcome with rt-PA, and has been proposed as a decision-making aid to patient selection for rt-PA." The estimates from this tool should, however, be treated with caution. The prediction rule is dependent on post hoc mathematical modeling, uses clinical trial data from subjects randomized beyond 3 hours who are not rt-PA-eligible according to FDA labeling and current best practice, and has not been externally validated. It is, therefore, not appropriate to exclude patients from rt-PA treatment based solely on Stroke-TPI predictions. 

Even if most examples and procedures presented apply to in-house validation, the procedure does not distinguish between validations conducted in a single laboratory and those carried out within inter-laboratory method performance studies. A preference for inter-laboratory studies can be concluded from the statement that laboratories should always give priority to methods which have been tested in method performance studies. Within the procedure a profound overview of different categories of analytical methods according to the available documentation and previous external validation is given. For example, if a method is externally validated in a method performance study, it should be tested for trueness and precision only. On the other hand, a full validation is recommended for those methods which are published in the scientific literature without complete presentation of essential performance characteristics (Table 9). 

The method is externally validated in a method-performance study The method is externally validated but used on a new matrix or using a new instrument... 

In summary, the procedure of the Nordic Committee describes a comprehensive validation protocol, but it is not specially designed for pesticide residue analysis and has no preferences with regard to single- or inter-laboratory validation. Therefore, if it is applied to pesticide residue methods, some specific validation requirements should be added. The procedure clearly lists all necessary steps of validation and adjusts its recommendations to the degree of previous external validation. 

Once again, however, an attractive mechanism identified in the laboratory encounters problems of external validity when transposed into an in vivo setting. The dosages of caffeine needed to inhibit phosphodi-... 

Consent Yield Externally Valid Results - an Empirical-Test , Psychopharmacology no, no. 4 (1993) 437-42... 

The information about internal and external validation for the model is used to evaluate the performance of the in silico tool. 

Construct validation suggests that classification is central to and inseparable from theory. Classification of a disorder forms a representation of the theoretical construct that is needed for the basis of elaboration and testing of the theory. A classification system like the DSM provides a means of translating or operationalizing abstract theoretical ideas into more concrete (often behavioral) definitions. Testing the theory (classification system) rests on tests of its internal and external validity. These tests inform us about the adequacy of both the classification system and the theory. It is conceivabe that theory and classification evolve together over time. Theory creates an initial classification scheme that is evaluated and, when refined, informs us about theory. 

Yin (Yin, 1994) discusses four criteria forjudging the quality of the research design. After the external validity as already discussed, Yin defines the construct validity, the reliability, and the internal validity. The construct validity is the validity of the operational measures used for the research concepts. In this study construct validity will be addressed by the use of multiple sources for data collection. Case histories,... 

Figure 6 In vitro release profiles for ISMN GEOMATRIX formulations. The small-scale batches used for IVIVC development and validation are shown in panel a, and the large-scale batches used for external validation are shown in panel b, with dotted line tracings for the small-scale batches. IVIVC development included two fast ( ), one medium (o), and two slow batches ( ), while external validation included two medium batches ( ).

Figure 7 Observed concentration—time data for ISMN from the test extended-release formulations included in the four PK studies. The profile for the reference formulation (a) is represented as an intravenous injection with the same AUC as the reference extended-release formulation (IMDUR) and the literature elimination half-life of 3.77 hr. IVIVC development included the two fast ( ) and one medium (o) batch from Study 194.573 and two slow batches ( ) from Study 372.05/196.638 and external validation included the two medium batches ( ) in Studies 196.581 and 372.02.

For a product where it is desired or necessary to show external predictability (e.g., to bridge to the commercial product for a low therapeutic index product), the external validation batch can be included in the same study as the IVIVC batches, normally in a separate study arm (i.e., not randomized). This reduces the probability of failing to fulfill the strict external validation criteria (prediction errors for Cmax and AUC of < 10%), as the data are collected in the same study population as those used to develop and validate the IVIVC. 

In order to increase the external validity of our models, it might be desirable to consider some nonnicotine ingredients of tobacco smoke. It appears that there are natural monamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors in tobacco smoke (Lewis et al. 2007). It would be interesting to determine whether the coadministration of a low dose of a standard MAO inhibitor along with chronic nicotine would increase physical dependence, as assessed by various withdrawal measures, hi view of the antidepressant properties of MAO inhibitors, measures reflecting aspects of depression might be particularly affected. 

Yet more powerful than the minimalist approach, the optimal consensus Cox2 model displays an excellent training RMS of 0.56 pICso units, for example, R = 0.825, and behaves even better with respect to the external validation set (RMS = 0.53 pICso units, Q2 = 0.841). 

Typically, the final part of QSAR model development is the model validation [17, 18], when the predictive power of the model is tested on an independent set of compounds. In essence, predictive power is one of the most important characteristics of QSAR models. It can be defined as the ability of a model to predict accurately the target property (e.g., biological activity) of compounds that were not used for model development. The typical problem of QSAR modeling is that at the time of the model development a researcher only has, essentially, training set molecules, so predictive ability can only be characterized by statistical characteristics of the training set model and not by true external validation. 

Thus, it is still uncommon to test QSAR models (characterized by a reasonably high q ) for their ability to predict accurately biological activities of compounds not included in the training set. In contrast to such expectations, it has been shown that if a test set with known values of biological activities is available for prediction, there exists no correlation between the LOO cross-validated and the correlation coefficient between the predicted and observed activities for the test set (Figure 16.1). In our experience [17, 28], this phenomenon is characteristic of many datasets and is independent of the descriptor types and optimization techniques used to develop training set models. In a recent review, we emphasized the importance of external validation in developing reliable models [18]. 

The test set method of validation is rather straightforward, but requires some caution. First, the test set samples must be sufficiently representative of samples that the model will be applied to in the future. Otherwise, external validation can provide misleading results - in either an optimistic or pessimistic manner. Under-representing the anticipated sample states could lead to optimistic results, while the use of sample states not represented in the calibration data could lead to pessimistic results. A practical disadvantage of the test set method is that it requires that the reference analytical method be performed on an additional set of samples beyond the original calibration samples, which can be an issue if the cost of each reference analysis is high. 

External validation. The general library and its sublibraries must be validated by checking that external spectra (for the validation step) are correctly, unambiguously identified. Likewise, samples not present in the library should not be identified with any of the compounds it contains. 

Monomer RMSEC (mol/L) RMSEP (mol/L) internal validation RMSEP (mol/L) external validation GC STD (mol/L)... 

---