TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods: a Korean translation.
作者信息
Collins Gary S, Moons Karel G M, Dhiman Paula, Riley Richard D, Beam Andrew L, Calster Ben Van, Ghassemi Marzyeh, Liu Xiaoxuan, Reitsma Johannes B, Smeden Maarten van, Boulesteix Anne-Laure, Camaradou Jennifer Catherine, Celi Leo Anthony, Denaxas Spiros, Denniston Alastair K, Glocker Ben, Golub Robert M, Harvey Hugh, Heinze Georg, Hoffman Michael M, Kengne André Pascal, Lam Emily, Lee Naomi, Loder Elizabeth W, Maier-Hein Lena, Mateen Bilal A, McCradden Melissa D, Oakden-Rayner Lauren, Ordish Johan, Parnell Richard, Rose Sherri, Singh Karandeep, Wynants Laure, Logullo Patricia
机构信息
Centre for Statistics in Medicine, UK EQUATOR Centre, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
出版信息
Ewha Med J. 2025 Jul;48(3):e48. doi: 10.12771/emj.2025.00668. Epub 2025 Jul 31.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods: a Korean translation.
Ewha Med J. 2025 Jul;48(3):e48. doi: 10.12771/emj.2025.00668. Epub 2025 Jul 31.
2
TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods.
BMJ. 2024 Apr 18;385:q902. doi: 10.1136/bmj.q902.
3
Protocol for development of a reporting guideline (TRIPOD-AI) and risk of bias tool (PROBAST-AI) for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies based on artificial intelligence.
BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 9;11(7):e048008. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048008.
4
TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods.
BMJ. 2024 Apr 16;385:e078378. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2023-078378.
5
Reporting and risk of bias of prediction models based on machine learning methods in preterm birth: A systematic review.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2023 Jan;102(1):7-14. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14475. Epub 2022 Nov 17.
6
Understanding the development, performance, fairness, and transparency of machine learning models used in child protection prediction: A systematic review.
Child Abuse Negl. 2025 Aug 7;169(Pt 1):107630. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2025.107630.
7
Methodological conduct and risk of bias in studies on prenatal birthweight prediction models using machine learning techniques: a systematic review.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025 Jul 2;25(1):696. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-07727-5.
8
Completeness of reporting of clinical prediction models developed using supervised machine learning: a systematic review.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Jan 13;22(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01469-6.
9
Transparency in Externally Validated Models: A systematic review of machine learning vs. logistic regression for predicting colorectal anastomotic leakage.
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2025 Aug 14;51(10):110367. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2025.110367.
10
A practical guide for nephrologist peer reviewers: evaluating artificial intelligence and machine learning research in nephrology.
Ren Fail. 2025 Dec;47(1):2513002. doi: 10.1080/0886022X.2025.2513002. Epub 2025 Jul 7.
引用本文的文献
1
Ten guidelines for contributors to medical artificial intelligence research.
Ewha Med J. 2025 Jul;48(3):e39. doi: 10.12771/emj.2025.00717. Epub 2025 Jul 31.
2
Ewha Medical Journal's inclusion in PubMed Central and PubMed, and artificial intelligence and guidelines in this issue.
Ewha Med J. 2025 Jul;48(3):e38. doi: 10.12771/emj.2025.00710. Epub 2025 Jul 31.
本文引用的文献
1
ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document): A reporting guideline for consensus methods in biomedicine developed via a modified Delphi.
PLoS Med. 2024 Jan 23;21(1):e1004326. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004326. eCollection 2024 Jan.
2
Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 3): calculating the sample size required for an external validation study.
BMJ. 2024 Jan 22;384:e074821. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2023-074821.
3
Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 2): how to undertake an external validation study.
BMJ. 2024 Jan 15;384:e074820. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2023-074820.
4
Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 1): from development to external validation.
BMJ. 2024 Jan 8;384:e074819. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2023-074819.
5
Open science practices need substantial improvement in prognostic model studies in oncology using machine learning.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Jan;165:111199. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.10.015. Epub 2023 Oct 28.
6
Open Science 2.0: Towards a truly collaborative research ecosystem.
PLoS Biol. 2023 Oct 19;21(10):e3002362. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002362. eCollection 2023 Oct.
7
Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models for individual prognosis or diagnosis: checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (TRIPOD-SRMA).
BMJ. 2023 May 3;381:e073538. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2022-073538.
8
Gynecological cancer prognosis using machine learning techniques: A systematic review of the last three decades (1990-2022).
Artif Intell Med. 2023 May;139:102536. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2023.102536. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
9
Commentary: Patient Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence; What have We Learned and How Should We Move Forward?
Adv Ther. 2023 Jun;40(6):2563-2572. doi: 10.1007/s12325-023-02511-3. Epub 2023 Apr 12.
10
Systematic review finds "spin" practices and poor reporting standards in studies on machine learning-based prediction models.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Jun;158:99-110. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.03.024. Epub 2023 Apr 5.
Zotero 插件