Kaiser Isabelle, Diehl Katharina, Heppt Markus V, Mathes Sonja, Pfahlberg Annette B, Steeb Theresa, Uter Wolfgang, Gefeller Olaf
Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, 91054 Erlangen, Germany.
Mannheim Institute of Public Health, Social and Preventive Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
Healthcare (Basel). 2022 Jan 26;10(2):238. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10020238.
Transparent and accurate reporting is essential to evaluate the validity and applicability of risk prediction models. Our aim was to evaluate the reporting quality of studies developing and validating risk prediction models for melanoma according to the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariate prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) checklist. We included studies that were identified by a recent systematic review and updated the literature search to ensure that our TRIPOD rating included all relevant studies. Six reviewers assessed compliance with all 37 TRIPOD components for each study using the published "TRIPOD Adherence Assessment Form". We further examined a potential temporal effect of the reporting quality. Altogether 42 studies were assessed including 35 studies reporting the development of a prediction model and seven studies reporting both development and validation. The median adherence to TRIPOD was 57% (range 29% to 78%). Study components that were least likely to be fully reported were related to model specification, title and abstract. Although the reporting quality has slightly increased over the past 35 years, there is still much room for improvement. Adherence to reporting guidelines such as TRIPOD in the publication of study results must be adopted as a matter of course to achieve a sufficient level of reporting quality necessary to foster the use of the prediction models in applications.
透明且准确的报告对于评估风险预测模型的有效性和适用性至关重要。我们的目的是根据TRIPOD（个体预后或诊断多变量预测模型的透明报告）清单评估开发和验证黑色素瘤风险预测模型的研究报告质量。我们纳入了近期一项系统评价所识别的研究，并更新了文献检索，以确保我们的TRIPOD评分涵盖所有相关研究。六位评审员使用已发表的“TRIPOD依从性评估表”评估每项研究对TRIPOD的37个组成部分的依从情况。我们进一步研究了报告质量的潜在时间效应。总共评估了42项研究，其中35项研究报告了预测模型的开发，7项研究报告了开发和验证情况。对TRIPOD的中位依从率为57%（范围29%至78%）。最不可能被完整报告的研究组成部分与模型规范、标题和摘要有关。尽管在过去35年中报告质量略有提高，但仍有很大的改进空间。在研究结果发表时遵守诸如TRIPOD之类的报告指南必须成为一种常态，以达到促进预测模型在应用中使用所需的足够报告质量水平。
