%0 Systematic Review
%T A scoping review finds a growing trend in studies validating multimorbidity patterns and identifies five broad types of validation methods.
%A Dhafari TB
%A Pate A
%A Azadbakht N
%A Bailey R
%A Rafferty J
%A Jalali-Najafabadi F
%A Martin GP
%A Hassaine A
%A Akbari A
%A Lyons J
%A Watkins A
%A Lyons RA
%A Peek N
%J J Clin Epidemiol
%V 165
%N 0
%D 2024 Jan 11
%M 37952700
%F 7.407
%R 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.11.004
%X <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>Multimorbidity, the presence of two or more long-term conditions, is a growing public health concern. Many studies use analytical methods to discover multimorbidity patterns from data. We aimed to review approaches used in published literature to validate these patterns.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>We systematically searched PubMed and Web of Science for studies published between July 2017 and July 2023 that used analytical methods to discover multimorbidity patterns.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Out of 31,617 studies returned by the searches, 172 were included. Of these, 111 studies (64%) conducted validation, the number of studies with validation increased from 53.13% (17 out of 32 studies) to 71.25% (57 out of 80 studies) in 2017-2019 to 2022-2023, respectively. Five types of validation were identified: assessing the association of multimorbidity patterns with clinical outcomes (n = 79), stability across subsamples (n = 26), clinical plausibility (n = 22), stability across methods (n = 7) and exploring common determinants (n = 2). Some studies used multiple types of validation.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>The number of studies conducting a validation of multimorbidity patterns is clearly increasing. The most popular validation approach is assessing the association of multimorbidity patterns with clinical outcomes. Methodological guidance on the validation of multimorbidity patterns is needed.