The Experts below are selected from a list of 28752 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Karel G.m. Moons - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Tripod statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models
BMJ open, 2020Co-Authors: Amir H. Zamanipoor Najafabadi, Chava L. Ramspek, Friedo W. Dekker, Pauline Heus, Lotty Hooft, Karel G.m. Moons, Wilco C. Peul, Gary S. Collins, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Merel Van DiepenAbstract:Objectives To assess the difference in completeness of reporting and methodological conduct of published prediction models before and after publication of the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) statement. Methods In the seven general medicine journals with the highest impact factor, we compared the completeness of the reporting and the quality of the methodology of prediction model studies published between 2012 and 2014 (pre-Tripod) with studies published between 2016 and 2017 (post-Tripod). For articles published in the post-Tripod period, we examined whether there was improved reporting for articles (1) citing the Tripod statement, and (2) published in journals that published the Tripod statement. Results A total of 70 articles was included (pre-Tripod: 32, post-Tripod: 38). No improvement was seen for the overall percentage of reported items after the publication of the Tripod statement (pre-Tripod 74%, post-Tripod 76%, 95% CI of absolute difference: −4% to 7%). For the individual Tripod items, an improvement was seen for 16 (44%) items, while 3 (8%) items showed no improvement and 17 (47%) items showed a deterioration. Post-Tripod, there was no improved reporting for articles citing the Tripod statement, nor for articles published in journals that published the Tripod statement. The methodological quality improved in the post-Tripod period. More models were externally validated in the same article (absolute difference 8%, post-Tripod: 39%), used measures of calibration (21%, post-Tripod: 87%) and discrimination (9%, post-Tripod: 100%), and used multiple imputation for handling missing data (12%, post-Tripod: 50%). Conclusions Since the publication of the Tripod statement, some reporting and methodological aspects have improved. Prediction models are still often poorly developed and validated and many aspects remain poorly reported, hindering optimal clinical application of these models. Long-term effects of the Tripod statement publication should be evaluated in future studies.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
European Urology, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Context Prediction models are developed to aid health care providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. Objective The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. Evidence acquisition This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, health care professionals, and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Evidence synthesis The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. Conclusions To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org). Patient summary The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
Diabetic Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (Tripod) initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study, regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org).
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Background Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. Methods An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Results The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. Conclusion The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. A complete checklist is available at http://www.Tripod-statement.org.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Background Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. Materials and methods The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Results The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. Conclusions To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org).
Gary S. Collins - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Tripod statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models
BMJ open, 2020Co-Authors: Amir H. Zamanipoor Najafabadi, Chava L. Ramspek, Friedo W. Dekker, Pauline Heus, Lotty Hooft, Karel G.m. Moons, Wilco C. Peul, Gary S. Collins, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Merel Van DiepenAbstract:Objectives To assess the difference in completeness of reporting and methodological conduct of published prediction models before and after publication of the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) statement. Methods In the seven general medicine journals with the highest impact factor, we compared the completeness of the reporting and the quality of the methodology of prediction model studies published between 2012 and 2014 (pre-Tripod) with studies published between 2016 and 2017 (post-Tripod). For articles published in the post-Tripod period, we examined whether there was improved reporting for articles (1) citing the Tripod statement, and (2) published in journals that published the Tripod statement. Results A total of 70 articles was included (pre-Tripod: 32, post-Tripod: 38). No improvement was seen for the overall percentage of reported items after the publication of the Tripod statement (pre-Tripod 74%, post-Tripod 76%, 95% CI of absolute difference: −4% to 7%). For the individual Tripod items, an improvement was seen for 16 (44%) items, while 3 (8%) items showed no improvement and 17 (47%) items showed a deterioration. Post-Tripod, there was no improved reporting for articles citing the Tripod statement, nor for articles published in journals that published the Tripod statement. The methodological quality improved in the post-Tripod period. More models were externally validated in the same article (absolute difference 8%, post-Tripod: 39%), used measures of calibration (21%, post-Tripod: 87%) and discrimination (9%, post-Tripod: 100%), and used multiple imputation for handling missing data (12%, post-Tripod: 50%). Conclusions Since the publication of the Tripod statement, some reporting and methodological aspects have improved. Prediction models are still often poorly developed and validated and many aspects remain poorly reported, hindering optimal clinical application of these models. Long-term effects of the Tripod statement publication should be evaluated in future studies.
-
uniformity in measuring adherence to reporting guidelines the example of Tripod for assessing completeness of reporting of prediction model studies
BMJ Open, 2019Co-Authors: Pauline Heus, Johannes B Reitsma, Johanna A A G Damen, Romin Pajouheshnia, R J P M Scholten, Gary S. CollinsAbstract:To promote uniformity in measuring adherence to the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) statement, a reporting guideline for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies, and thereby facilitate comparability of future studies assessing its impact, we transformed the original 22 Tripod items into an adherence assessment form and defined adherence scoring rules. Tripod specific challenges encountered were the existence of different types of prediction model studies and possible combinations of these within publications. More general issues included dealing with multiple reporting elements, reference to information in another publication, and non-applicability of items. We recommend our adherence assessment form to be used by anyone (eg, researchers, reviewers, editors) evaluating adherence to Tripod, to make these assessments comparable. In general, when developing a form to assess adherence to a reporting guideline, we recommend formulating specific adherence elements (if needed multiple per reporting guideline item) using unambiguous wording and the consideration of issues of applicability in advance.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
European Urology, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Context Prediction models are developed to aid health care providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. Objective The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. Evidence acquisition This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, health care professionals, and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Evidence synthesis The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. Conclusions To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org). Patient summary The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
Diabetic Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (Tripod) initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study, regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org).
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Background Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. Methods An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Results The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. Conclusion The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. A complete checklist is available at http://www.Tripod-statement.org.
Arnd Vogler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Optical properties of Ag(Tripod)X with Tripod = 1,1,1-tris(diphenyl-phosphinomethyl)ethane and X− = Cl− and I−: Intraligand and ligand-to-ligand charge transfer
Inorganica Chimica Acta, 2006Co-Authors: Horst Kunkely, Arnd VoglerAbstract:Abstract The complexes Ag I (Tripod)X with Tripod = 1,1,1-tris(diphenylphosphinomethyl)ethane and X − = Cl − and I − are luminescent in solution at r.t. It is suggested that the emission is a phosphorescence which originates from a Tripod intraligand state for X = Cl ( λ max = 464 nm) and a X − → Tripod ligand-to-ligand charge transfer state for X = I ( λ max = 482 nm).
Leendert W Hamoen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
membrane curvature and the tol pal complex determine polar localization of the chemoreceptor tar in escherichia coli
Journal of Bacteriology, 2018Co-Authors: Terrens N V Saaki, Henrik Strahl, Leendert W HamoenAbstract:ABSTRACT Chemoreceptors are localized at the cell poles of Escherichia coli and other rod-shaped bacteria. Over the years, different mechanisms have been put forward to explain this polar localization, including stochastic clustering, membrane curvature-driven localization, interactions with the Tol-Pal complex, and nucleoid exclusion. To evaluate these mechanisms, we monitored the cellular localization of the aspartate chemoreceptor Tar in different deletion mutants. We did not find any indication for either stochastic cluster formation or nucleoid exclusion. However, the presence of a functional Tol-Pal complex appeared to be essential to retain Tar at the cell poles. Interestingly, Tar still accumulated at midcell in tol and in pal deletion mutants. In these mutants, the protein appears to gather at the base of division septa, a region characterized by strong membrane curvature. Chemoreceptors, like Tar, form trimers of dimers that bend the cell membrane due to a rigid Tripod structure. The curvature approaches the curvature of the cell membrane generated during cell division, and localization of chemoreceptor Tripods at curved membrane areas is therefore energetically favorable, as it lowers membrane tension. Indeed, when we introduced mutations in Tar that abolish the rigid Tripod structure, the protein was no longer able to accumulate at midcell or the cell poles. These findings favor a model where chemoreceptor localization in E. coli is driven by strong membrane curvature and association with the Tol-Pal complex. IMPORTANCE Bacteria have exquisite mechanisms to sense and adapt to the environment they live in. One such mechanism involves the chemotaxis signal transduction pathway, in which chemoreceptors specifically bind certain attracting or repelling molecules and transduce the signals to the cell. In different rod-shaped bacteria, these chemoreceptors localize specifically to cell poles. Here, we examined the polar localization of the aspartate chemoreceptor Tar in E. coli and found that membrane curvature at cell division sites and the Tol-Pal protein complex localize Tar at cell division sites, the future cell poles. This study shows how membrane curvature can guide localization of proteins in a cell.
-
membrane curvature and the tol pal complex determine polar localization of the chemoreceptor tar in e coli
bioRxiv, 2017Co-Authors: Terrens N V Saaki, Henrik Strahl, Leendert W HamoenAbstract:Chemoreceptors are localized at the cell poles of Escherichia coli and other rod-shaped bacteria. Over the years different mechanisms have been put forward to explain this polar localization; from stochastic clustering, membrane curvature driven localization, interactions with the Tol-Pal complex, to nucleoid exclusion. To evaluate these mechanisms, we monitored the cellular localization of the aspartate chemoreceptor Tar in different deletion mutants. We did not find any indication for either stochastic cluster formation or nucleoid exclusion. However, the presence of a functional Tol-Pal complex appeared to be essential to retain Tar at cell poles. This finding also implies that the curvature of cell poles does not attract chemoreceptor complexes. Interestingly, Tar still accumulated at midcell in tol and in pal deletion mutants. In these mutants, the protein appears to gather at the base of division septa, a region characterised by strong membrane curvature. Chemoreceptors, like Tar, form trimer-of-dimers that bend the cell membrane due to a rigid Tripod structure with an estimated curvature of approximately 37 nm. This curvature approaches the curvature of the cell membrane generated during cell division, and localization of chemoreceptor Tripods at curved membrane areas is therefore energetically favourable as it lowers membrane tension. Indeed, when we introduced mutations in Tar that abolish the rigid Tripod structure, the protein was no longer able to accumulate at midcell or cell poles. These findings favour a model where chemoreceptor localization in E. coli is driven by strong membrane curvature and association with the Tol-Pal complex.
Johannes B Reitsma - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
uniformity in measuring adherence to reporting guidelines the example of Tripod for assessing completeness of reporting of prediction model studies
BMJ Open, 2019Co-Authors: Pauline Heus, Johannes B Reitsma, Johanna A A G Damen, Romin Pajouheshnia, R J P M Scholten, Gary S. CollinsAbstract:To promote uniformity in measuring adherence to the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) statement, a reporting guideline for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies, and thereby facilitate comparability of future studies assessing its impact, we transformed the original 22 Tripod items into an adherence assessment form and defined adherence scoring rules. Tripod specific challenges encountered were the existence of different types of prediction model studies and possible combinations of these within publications. More general issues included dealing with multiple reporting elements, reference to information in another publication, and non-applicability of items. We recommend our adherence assessment form to be used by anyone (eg, researchers, reviewers, editors) evaluating adherence to Tripod, to make these assessments comparable. In general, when developing a form to assess adherence to a reporting guideline, we recommend formulating specific adherence elements (if needed multiple per reporting guideline item) using unambiguous wording and the consideration of issues of applicability in advance.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
European Urology, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Context Prediction models are developed to aid health care providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. Objective The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. Evidence acquisition This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, health care professionals, and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Evidence synthesis The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. Conclusions To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org). Patient summary The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
Diabetic Medicine, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (Tripod) initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study, regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org).
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Background Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. Methods An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Results The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. Conclusion The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. A complete checklist is available at http://www.Tripod-statement.org.
-
transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis Tripod the Tripod statement
European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2015Co-Authors: Gary S. Collins, Johannes B Reitsma, Douglas G Altman, Karel G.m. MoonsAbstract:Background Prediction models are developed to aid healthcare providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision-making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. Materials and methods The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (Tripod) initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the Tripod Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, healthcare professionals and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of Tripod contributors. Results The resulting Tripod Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The Tripod Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The Tripod Statement is best used in conjunction with the Tripod explanation and elaboration document. Conclusions To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.Tripod-statement.org).
