Back

PRE-CISE: A PRE-calibration Coverage, Identifiability, and SEnsitivity analysis workflow to streamline model calibration

Gracia, V.; Goldhaber-Fiebert, J. D.; Alarid-Escudero, F.

2026-03-02 health policy
10.64898/2026.02.27.26346591 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeWe introduce PRE-CISE, a pre-calibration workflow that integrates coverage analysis, local sensitivity, and collinearity diagnostics to streamline model calibration and transparently address nonidentifiability. We demonstrate the benefits of PRE-CISE using a four-state Sick-Sicker Markov testbed and a COVID-19 case study. MethodsPRE-CISE begins with a coverage analysis to verify that model outputs generated with parameter sets drawn from their prior distribution span calibration targets, followed by local sensitivities to quantify the influence of parameters on model outputs, guiding the resizing of the prior distribution bounds to improve coverage. Identifiability is then assessed via collinearity analysis; large indices indicate practical nonidentifiability. For the testbed model, we calibrated 3 parameters to survival, prevalence, and the proportion of Sick to Sicker at 10, 20, and 30 years. For the COVID-19 model, we calibrated 11 parameters to match daily confirmed incident cases. Bayesian calibration was conducted on both analyses. ResultsCoverage analyses flagged initial misfits; local sensitivities identified the Sick-to-Sicker transition probability has a greater effect on model outputs, and resizing its prior distribution bounds improved coverage. Collinearity analyses showed that combining multiple calibration targets across time points enabled recovery of all three parameters. In the COVID-19 model, local sensitivity analyses prioritized time-varying detection rates and contact-reduction effects, reducing the search space, thereby improving calibration efficiency. Daily incident case calibration targets yielded collinearity indices below practical thresholds (e.g., < 15) for all parameter combinations, whereas weekly calibration targets were larger and closer to the cutoff. ConclusionsPRE-CISE provides a practical, transparent pathway that helps modelers refine prior distribution bounds and calibration targets before intensive calibration, improving uncertainty reporting and strengthening the reliability of model-based health policy analyses.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Medical Decision Making
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
42.1%
2
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
9.7%
50% of probability mass above
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.7%
4
Statistics in Medicine
40 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
5
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.4%
6
Epidemics
116 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.5%
7
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.8%
8
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.9%
9
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.9%
10
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
129 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
11
Clinical Trials
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 35%
1.1%
13
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.1%
14
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
15
BMJ Global Health
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.0%
17
American Journal of Epidemiology
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
18
BMC Public Health
158 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
19
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
20
BMC Medicine
176 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%