Prognostic models that aim to improve the prediction of clinical events, individualized treatment and decision-making are increasingly being developed and published. However, relatively few models are externally validated and validation by independent researchers is rare. External validation is necessary to determine a prediction model’s reproducibility and generalizability to new and different patients. Various methodological considerations are important when assessing or designing an external validation study. In this article, an overview is provided of these considerations, starting with what external validation is, what types of external validation can be distinguished and why such studies are a crucial step towards the clinical implementation of accurate prediction models. Statistical analyses and interpretation of external validation results are reviewed in an intuitive manner and considerations for selecting an appropriate existing prediction model and external validation population are discussed. This study enables clinicians and researchers to gain a deeper understanding of how to interpret model validation results and how to translate these results to their own patient population.

Dialysate solute removal was an independent predictor of mortality. The association between systolic blood pressure and mortality shows that the maintenance of fluid balance and the removal of small solutes deserve equal attention.

In this article we introduce the concept of inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and describe how this method can be applied to adjust for measured confounding in observational research, illustrated by a clinical example from nephrology. IPTW involves two main steps. First, the probability—or propensity—of being exposed to the risk factor or intervention of interest is calculated, given an individual’s characteristics (i.e. propensity score). Second, weights are calculated as the inverse of the propensity score. The application of these weights to the study population creates a pseudopopulation in which confounders are equally distributed across exposed and unexposed groups. We also elaborate on how weighting can be applied in longitudinal studies to deal with informative censoring and time-dependent confounding in the setting of treatment-confounder feedback.

No abstract