Cargando…

Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques

INTRODUCTION: Studies addressing the development and/or validation of diagnostic and prognostic prediction models are abundant in most clinical domains. Systematic reviews have shown that the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies is suboptimal. Due to the increasing availa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andaur Navarro, Constanza L, Damen, Johanna A A G, Takada, Toshihiko, Nijman, Steven W J, Dhiman, Paula, Ma, Jie, Collins, Gary S, Bajpai, Ram, Riley, Richard D, Moons, Karel GM, Hooft, Lotty
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7661369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33177137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038832
_version_ 1783609194132275200
author Andaur Navarro, Constanza L
Damen, Johanna A A G
Takada, Toshihiko
Nijman, Steven W J
Dhiman, Paula
Ma, Jie
Collins, Gary S
Bajpai, Ram
Riley, Richard D
Moons, Karel GM
Hooft, Lotty
author_facet Andaur Navarro, Constanza L
Damen, Johanna A A G
Takada, Toshihiko
Nijman, Steven W J
Dhiman, Paula
Ma, Jie
Collins, Gary S
Bajpai, Ram
Riley, Richard D
Moons, Karel GM
Hooft, Lotty
author_sort Andaur Navarro, Constanza L
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Studies addressing the development and/or validation of diagnostic and prognostic prediction models are abundant in most clinical domains. Systematic reviews have shown that the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies is suboptimal. Due to the increasing availability of larger, routinely collected and complex medical data, and the rising application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) techniques, the number of prediction model studies is expected to increase even further. Prediction models developed using AI or ML techniques are often labelled as a ‘black box’ and little is known about their methodological and reporting quality. Therefore, this comprehensive systematic review aims to evaluate the reporting quality, the methodological conduct, and the risk of bias of prediction model studies that applied ML techniques for model development and/or validation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A search will be performed in PubMed to identify studies developing and/or validating prediction models using any ML methodology and across all medical fields. Studies will be included if they were published between January 2018 and December 2019, predict patient-related outcomes, use any study design or data source, and available in English. Screening of search results and data extraction from included articles will be performed by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes of this systematic review are: (1) the adherence of ML-based prediction model studies to the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD), and (2) the risk of bias in such studies as assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). A narrative synthesis will be conducted for all included studies. Findings will be stratified by study type, medical field and prevalent ML methods, and will inform necessary extensions or updates of TRIPOD and PROBAST to better address prediction model studies that used AI or ML techniques. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study because only available published data will be analysed. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42019161764.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7661369
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76613692020-11-20 Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques Andaur Navarro, Constanza L Damen, Johanna A A G Takada, Toshihiko Nijman, Steven W J Dhiman, Paula Ma, Jie Collins, Gary S Bajpai, Ram Riley, Richard D Moons, Karel GM Hooft, Lotty BMJ Open Epidemiology INTRODUCTION: Studies addressing the development and/or validation of diagnostic and prognostic prediction models are abundant in most clinical domains. Systematic reviews have shown that the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies is suboptimal. Due to the increasing availability of larger, routinely collected and complex medical data, and the rising application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) techniques, the number of prediction model studies is expected to increase even further. Prediction models developed using AI or ML techniques are often labelled as a ‘black box’ and little is known about their methodological and reporting quality. Therefore, this comprehensive systematic review aims to evaluate the reporting quality, the methodological conduct, and the risk of bias of prediction model studies that applied ML techniques for model development and/or validation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A search will be performed in PubMed to identify studies developing and/or validating prediction models using any ML methodology and across all medical fields. Studies will be included if they were published between January 2018 and December 2019, predict patient-related outcomes, use any study design or data source, and available in English. Screening of search results and data extraction from included articles will be performed by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes of this systematic review are: (1) the adherence of ML-based prediction model studies to the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD), and (2) the risk of bias in such studies as assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). A narrative synthesis will be conducted for all included studies. Findings will be stratified by study type, medical field and prevalent ML methods, and will inform necessary extensions or updates of TRIPOD and PROBAST to better address prediction model studies that used AI or ML techniques. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study because only available published data will be analysed. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42019161764. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7661369/ /pubmed/33177137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038832 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Epidemiology
Andaur Navarro, Constanza L
Damen, Johanna A A G
Takada, Toshihiko
Nijman, Steven W J
Dhiman, Paula
Ma, Jie
Collins, Gary S
Bajpai, Ram
Riley, Richard D
Moons, Karel GM
Hooft, Lotty
Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
title Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
title_full Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
title_fullStr Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
title_full_unstemmed Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
title_short Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
title_sort protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
topic Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7661369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33177137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038832
work_keys_str_mv AT andaurnavarroconstanzal protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT damenjohannaaag protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT takadatoshihiko protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT nijmanstevenwj protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT dhimanpaula protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT majie protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT collinsgarys protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT bajpairam protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT rileyrichardd protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT moonskarelgm protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques
AT hooftlotty protocolforasystematicreviewonthemethodologicalandreportingqualityofpredictionmodelstudiesusingmachinelearningtechniques