Cited by 823Statistical Methods in EpidemiologyMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 2: Prognostic Factor Research

Open access
Riley, Richard D., Hayden, Jill A., Steyerberg, Ewout W., Moons, Karel G. M., Abrams, Keith, Kyzas, Panayiotis A., Malats, Núria, Briggs, Andrew +4 more·2013·PLoS Medicine

Abstract

Prognostic factor research aims to identify factors associated with subsequent clinical outcome in people with a particular disease or health condition.In this article, the second in the PROGRESS series, the authors discuss the role of prognostic factors in current clinical practice, randomised trials, and developing new interventions, and explain why and how prognostic factor research should be improved.The Guidelines and Guidance section contains advice on conducting and reporting medical research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001380

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 71 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [8]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2008) NICE technology appraisal guidance 152: drug-eluting stents for the treatment of coronary artery disease (part review of NICE technology appraisal guidance 71). NICE
  2. [68]Moons KG (2010) Criteria for scientific evaluation of novel markers: a perspective. Clin Chem 56: 537– 541. 20133890

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Riley, R. D., Hayden, J. A., Steyerberg, E. W., Moons, K. G. M., Abrams, K., Kyzas, P. A., Malats, N., Briggs, A., Schroter, S., Altman, D. G., Hemingway, H., & for the PROGRESS Group
Affiliations
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • University of Leicester (GB)
  • North Manchester General Hospital (GB)
  • Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (ES)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • BMJ Group (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Riley, Richard D.
Venue
PLoS Medicine
Published
2013-02-05
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
e1001380
ISSN
  • 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-1676
OpenAlex
W2100741073
Cited by
823
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 95 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 1
FWCI
9.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (acceptedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Queen Mary University of London
  • National Institute for Social Care and Health Research
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Wellcome Trust (086091, 086091/Z/08/Z)
  • Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation
  • Cancer Research UK (C5529)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0509-10183, NI-SI-0508-10061, RP-PG-0407-10314, NF-SI-0512-10159, RP-PG-0407-10386)
  • British Heart Foundation
  • University of Birmingham
  • Dalhousie University
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (918.10.615)
  • Center for Translational Molecular Medicine (03O-203)
  • Versus Arthritis
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Medical Research Council (G0800808, G0902393)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
  • Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
prognostic factors, prognosis, clinical outcomes, research strategies, randomised trials, intervention development, research reporting, clinical practice
MeSH terms
Decision Support Techniques, Health Services Research, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Research Design, Risk Factors, Biomarkers, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Disease Progression, Risk Assessment, Biomedical Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review