Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD)
Open accessAbstract
Letters19 May 2015Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD)Gary S. Collins, PhD, Johannes B. Reitsma, MD, PhD, Douglas G. Altman, DSc, and Karel G.M. Moons, PhDGary S. Collins, PhDFrom University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Johannes B. Reitsma, MD, PhDFrom University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Douglas G. Altman, DScFrom University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands., and Karel G.M. Moons, PhDFrom University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/L15-5093-2 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) Statement concerns prediction models that are developed for diagnosis or prognosis. We believe that the additional type of prediction that Dr. Burke refers to as "risk prediction" is subsumed within the prognostic framework. Prognostic models as referred to in TRIPOD predict a certain health condition (such as death, a disease, a complication, a recurrent event, or any other outcome…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Many ICU studies involving AI methods still fail to meet these standards, leading to concerns about inadequate external validation and generalizability.
“Despite the availability of these frameworks, many ICU studies involving AI methods still fail to meet these standards, leading to concerns about inadequate external validation and generalizability [68, 72, 73].”
From Implementing Artificial Intelligence in Critical Care Medicine: a consensus of 22. (2025) · cites this paper as [72]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 2 · Cited by 493
- Authors
- Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M.
- Affiliations
- From University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
- University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 2015-05-19
- Volume
- 162
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 735-736
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W1581514961
- Cited by
- 493
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 3
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- dspace.library.uu.nl
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Cancer Research UK (16895)
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0508-10259, NF-SI-0513-10131)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- TRIPOD statement, multivariable prediction models, prognostic model, risk prediction, individual prognosis, individual diagnosis, reporting guidelines
- MeSH terms
- Decision Support Techniques, Diagnosis, Humans, Prognosis, Models, Statistical
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
