Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Informative titles and abstracts are important for the identification of potentially relevant studies and communication of research results. Many readers and reviewers base their decision to read the full text of a publication on clarity and detail presented in the title and abstract. Clear and informative reporting in title and abstract is therefore essential. The TRIPOD Statement, published in 2015, is a guideline for Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis. TRIPOD provides general recommendations for the reporting of title and abstracts, however, more detailed guidance is desirable.
Objectives: To develop specific guidance for informative reporting of diagnostic or prognostic prediction model studies in both journal and conference abstracts.
Methods: We conducted a literature review on the reporting of prediction model studies and established a list of potentially relevant items to report in abstracts. This list served as the basis for a modified Delphi procedure. In the first round a panel of 110 experts in the field of prediction modeling studies were asked to rate to what extent each candidate item is essential. A maximum of two Delphi rounds will be carried out to reach consensus on whether to include an item and to provide insight into potential wording.
Results: Preliminary analyses from our literature review showed that objectives, setting, participants, sample size, outcome and conclusions were reported in over 75% of 134 abstracts. Candidate predictors, internal validation technique and results for calibration were addressed in fewer than 25% of abstracts.
The modified Delphi procedure is currently being carried out. We will present the results of this procedure and the guidance resulting from it.
Conclusions: We present the development of a specific checklist and corresponding guidance for the reporting of diagnostic or prognostic prediction model studies in both journal and conference abstracts: TRIPOD for Abstracts. The guidance will be applicable to abstracts of publications that describe development or external validation of a prediction model.
Objectives: To develop specific guidance for informative reporting of diagnostic or prognostic prediction model studies in both journal and conference abstracts.
Methods: We conducted a literature review on the reporting of prediction model studies and established a list of potentially relevant items to report in abstracts. This list served as the basis for a modified Delphi procedure. In the first round a panel of 110 experts in the field of prediction modeling studies were asked to rate to what extent each candidate item is essential. A maximum of two Delphi rounds will be carried out to reach consensus on whether to include an item and to provide insight into potential wording.
Results: Preliminary analyses from our literature review showed that objectives, setting, participants, sample size, outcome and conclusions were reported in over 75% of 134 abstracts. Candidate predictors, internal validation technique and results for calibration were addressed in fewer than 25% of abstracts.
The modified Delphi procedure is currently being carried out. We will present the results of this procedure and the guidance resulting from it.
Conclusions: We present the development of a specific checklist and corresponding guidance for the reporting of diagnostic or prognostic prediction model studies in both journal and conference abstracts: TRIPOD for Abstracts. The guidance will be applicable to abstracts of publications that describe development or external validation of a prediction model.