Reporting quality of studies developing and validating melanoma prediction models

• Verfasst von: Kaiser, Isabelle [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Diehl, Katharina [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Heppt, Markus V. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Mathes, Sonja [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Pfahlberg, Annette B. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Steeb, Theresa [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Uter, Wolfgang [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Gefeller, Olaf [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Reporting quality of studies developing and validating melanoma prediction models
• Titelzusatz: an assessment based on the TRIPOD statement
• Verf.angabe: Isabelle Kaiser, Katharina Diehl, Markus V. Heppt, Sonja Mathes, Annette B. Pfahlberg, Theresa Steeb, Wolfgang Uter and Olaf Gefeller
• E-Jahr: 2022
• Jahr: 26 January 2022
• Umfang: 19 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 03.09.2024
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Healthcare
• Ort Quelle: Basel : MDPI, 2013
• Jahr Quelle: 2022
• Band/Heft Quelle: 10(2022), 2, Artikel-ID 238, Seite 1-19
• ISSN Quelle: 2227-9032
• DOI: doi:10.3390/healthcare10020238
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: melanoma
• Sach-SW: prediction models
• Sach-SW: reporting quality
• Sach-SW: TRIPOD
• K10plus-PPN: 1900943999

Abstract

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.