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 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
34.8%
2
Medical Decision Making
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.9%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.2%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 9%
3.7%
7
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
8
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
9
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
10
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
11
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 35%
1.5%
12
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
13
CMAJ Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
14
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
15
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
16
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
17
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.7%
18
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
19
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
20
BMC Research Notes
29 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%
21
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%