TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models
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 gener...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020-09-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e041537.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841553557518548992 |
|---|---|
| author | Gary S Collins Karel G M Moons Lotty Hooft Ewout W Steyerberg Pauline Heus Merel van Diepen Friedo W Dekker Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi Chava L Ramspek Wilco C Peul |
| author_facet | Gary S Collins Karel G M Moons Lotty Hooft Ewout W Steyerberg Pauline Heus Merel van Diepen Friedo W Dekker Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi Chava L Ramspek Wilco C Peul |
| author_sort | Gary S Collins |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | 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. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-d9178a2a163f4e84af0b3d09f5300613 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-09-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj-art-d9178a2a163f4e84af0b3d09f53006132025-01-09T07:20:08ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552020-09-0110910.1136/bmjopen-2020-041537TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction modelsGary S Collins0Karel G M Moons1Lotty Hooft2Ewout W Steyerberg3Pauline Heus4Merel van Diepen5Friedo W Dekker6Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi7Chava L Ramspek8Wilco C Peul9professorprofessor of clinical epidemiologyJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlandsprofessorresearcherpostdoctoral epidemiologistprofessor of clinical epidemiologyDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Neurosurgical Center Holland, Leiden University Medical Center, Haaglanden Medical Center and Haga Teaching Hospitals, Leiden and The Hague, The Netherlandsmedical doctorUniversity Neurosurgical Center Holland, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, NetherlandsObjectives 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.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e041537.full |
| spellingShingle | Gary S Collins Karel G M Moons Lotty Hooft Ewout W Steyerberg Pauline Heus Merel van Diepen Friedo W Dekker Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi Chava L Ramspek Wilco C Peul TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models BMJ Open |
| title | TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models |
| title_full | TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models |
| title_fullStr | TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models |
| title_full_unstemmed | TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models |
| title_short | TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models |
| title_sort | tripod statement a preliminary pre post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e041537.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT garyscollins tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT karelgmmoons tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT lottyhooft tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT ewoutwsteyerberg tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT paulineheus tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT merelvandiepen tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT friedowdekker tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT amirhzamanipoornajafabadi tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT chavalramspek tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels AT wilcocpeul tripodstatementapreliminaryprepostanalysisofreportingandmethodsofpredictionmodels |