Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration

Janssens, A. Cecile J.W.; Ioannidis, John P. A.; Bedrosian, Sara; Boffetta, Paolo; Dolan, Siobhan M.; Dowling, Nicole F.; Fortier, Isabel; Freedman, Andrew; Grimshaw, Jeremy; Gulcher, Jeffrey R.; Gwinn, Marta; Hlatky, Mark A.; Janes, Holly; Kraft, Peter; Melillo, Stephanie; O’Donnell, Christopher J.; Pencina, Michael J.; Ransohoff, David F.; Schully, Sheri D.; Seminara, Daniela; Winn, Deborah M.; Wright, Caroline F.; Duijn, Cornelia M. van; Little, Julian; Khoury, Muin J.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2362.2011.02493.x

Cited by 36 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the TRIPOD Statement, we produced a supporting explanation and elaboration document in a similar style to those for other reporting guidelines . Each checklist item is explained and accompanied by examples of good reporting from published articles.…”

Section: The Tripod Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement

Collins

Reitsma

Altman

et al. 2015

BJOG

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. 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, 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. 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 http://www.tripod-statement.org).

show abstract

Section: The Tripod Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement

Collins

Reitsma

Altman

et al. 2015

BJOG

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the TRIPOD Statement, we produced a supporting explanation and elaboration document [ 43 ] in a similar style to those for other reporting guidelines [ 47 – 49 ]. Each checklist item is explained and accompanied by examples of good reporting from published articles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. 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, 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. 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).Editors’ note: In order to encourage dissemination of the TRIPOD Statement, this article is freely accessible on the Annals of Internal Medicine Web site (www.annals.org) and will be also published in BJOG, British Journal of Cancer, British Journal of Surgery, BMC Medicine, British Medical Journal, Circulation, Diabetic Medicine, European Journal of Clinical Investigation, European Urology, and Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. The authors jointly hold the copyright of this article. An accompanying Explanation and Elaboration article is freely available only on www.annals.org; Annals of Internal Medicine holds copyright for that article.

show abstract

“…Accompanying this GRIPS statement, an Explanation and Elaboration document has been written [1], modelled after those developed for other reporting guidelines [19][20][21][22]. The Explanation and Elaboration document illustrates each item with at least one published example that we consider transparent in reporting, explains the rationale for its inclusion in the checklist and presents the details of the items that need to be addressed to ensure transparent reporting.…”

Section: The Grips Explanation and Elaboration Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies: the GRIPS statement

Janssens

Ioannidis

Duijn

et al. 2011

European Journal of Clinical Investigation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration

Cited by 36 publications

References 96 publications

Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement

Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement

Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies: the GRIPS statement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About