Overinterpretation of findings in machine learning prediction model studies in oncology: a systematic review

Overinterpretation of findings in machine learning prediction model studies in oncology: a systematic review

<strong>Objectives<br></strong> In biomedical research, spin is the overinterpretation of findings, and it is a growing concern. To date, the presence of spin has not been evaluated in prognostic model research in oncology, including studies developing and validating models for ind...

Szczegółowa specyfikacja

Opis bibliograficzny
Główni autorzy:	Dhiman, P, Ma, J, Andaur Navarro, CL, Speich, B, Bullock, G, Damen, JAA, Hooft, L, Kirtley, S, Riley, RD, Van Calster, B, Moons, KGM, Collins, GS
Format:	Journal article
Język:	English
Wydane:	Elsevier 2023

Podobne zapisy

Risk of bias of prognostic models developed using machine learning: a systematic review in oncology
od: Dhiman, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2022)

Methodological conduct of prognostic prediction models developed using machine learning in oncology: a systematic review
od: Dhiman, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2022)

Reporting of prognostic clinical prediction models based on machine learning methods in oncology needs to be improved
od: Dhiman, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2021)

Systematic review finds "spin" practices and poor reporting standards in studies on machine learning-based prediction models
od: Andaur Navarro, CL, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Completeness of reporting of clinical prediction models developed using supervised machine learning: a systematic review
od: Andaur Navarro, CL, i wsp.
Wydane: (2022)

Risk of bias in studies on prediction models developed using supervised machine learning techniques: systematic review
od: Andaur Navarro, CL, i wsp.
Wydane: (2021)

Overinterpretation and misreporting of prognostic factor studies in oncology: a systematic review
od: Kempf, E, i wsp.
Wydane: (2018)

Systematic review identifies the design and methodological conduct of studies on machine learning-based prediction models
od: Andaur Navarro, CL, i wsp.
Wydane: (2022)

Risk of bias of prognostic models developed using machine learning: a systematic review in oncology
od: Paula Dhiman, i wsp.
Wydane: (2022-07-01)

Overinterpretation and misreporting of prognostic factor studies in medical oncology
od: Kempf, E, i wsp.
Wydane: (2016)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models for individual prognosis or diagnosis: checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (TRIPOD-SRMA)
od: Snell, KIE, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Risk of bias assessments in individual participant data meta-analyses of test accuracy and prediction models: a review shows improvements are needed
od: Levis, B, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
od: Andaur Navarro, CL, i wsp.
Wydane: (2020)

Protocol for development of a reporting guideline (TRIPOD-AI) and risk of bias tool (PROBAST-AI) for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies based on artificial intelligence
od: Collins, GS, i wsp.
Wydane: (2021)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models developed or validated using clustered data: TRIPOD-Cluster checklist
od: Debray, TPA, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models developed or validated using clustered data (TRIPOD-Cluster): explanation and elaboration
od: Debray, TPA, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Overinterpretation is common in pathological diagnosis of appendix cancer during patient referral for oncologic care.
od: Mark A Valasek, i wsp.
Wydane: (2017-01-01)

Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 1): from development to external validation
od: Collins, GS, i wsp.
Wydane: (2024)

Mosaicism in preimplantation embryos: Are we overinterpreting the results?
od: Glenn Schattman, M.D.
Wydane: (2023-09-01)

Open science practices need substantial improvement in prognostic model studies in oncology using machine learning
od: Collins, GS, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

A note on estimating the Cox-Snell R2 from a reported C statistic (AUROC) to inform sample size calculations for developing a prediction model with a binary outcome
od: Riley, RD, i wsp.
Wydane: (2020)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models in journal and conference abstracts: TRIPOD for abstracts
od: Heus, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2020)

Overinterpretation and Overtreatment of Low-Titer Antibodies Against Contactin-Associated Protein-2
od: Christian G. Bien
Wydane: (2018-04-01)

Interpretation and Overinterpretation of Ja’far Ibn Hasan Al-Barzanji’s Mawlid Al-Barzanji
od: Fadlil Munawwar Mashur
Wydane: (2017-10-01)

Multivariate unmixing approaches on Raman images of plant cell walls: new insights or overinterpretation of results?
od: Batirtze Prats-Mateu, i wsp.
Wydane: (2018-07-01)

Protocol for development of a reporting guideline (TRIPOD-AI) and risk of bias tool (PROBAST-AI) for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies based on artificial intelligence
od: Gary S Collins, i wsp.
Wydane: (2021-07-01)

Protocol for a systematic review on the methodological and reporting quality of prediction model studies using machine learning techniques
od: Gary S Collins, i wsp.
Wydane: (2020-11-01)

Completeness of reporting of clinical prediction models developed using supervised machine learning: a systematic review
od: Constanza L. Andaur Navarro, i wsp.
Wydane: (2022-01-01)

Methodology over metrics: current scientific standards are a disservice to patients and society
od: Van Calster, B, i wsp.
Wydane: (2021)

TRIPOD statement: a preliminary pre-post analysis of reporting and methods of prediction models
od: Zamanipoor Najafabadi, AH, i wsp.
Wydane: (2020)

Reporting guidelines used varying methodology to develop recommendations
od: Schlussel, MM, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

On the aggregation of published prognostic scores for causal inference in observational studies
od: Nguyen, T-L, i wsp.
Wydane: (2020)

PROBAST: A tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies
od: Wolff, RF, i wsp.
Wydane: (2019)

Sample size requirements are not being considered in studies developing prediction models for binary outcomes: a systematic review
od: Dhiman, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

A systematic review showed more consideration is needed when conducting nonrandomized studies of interventions.
od: Dhiman, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2019)

Poor handling of continuous predictors in clinical prediction models using logistic regression: a systematic review
od: Ma, J, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Artificial intelligence in lung cancer diagnostic imaging: a review of the reporting and conduct of research published 2018–2019
od: Logullo, P, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)

Regarding a nomogram to predict osteoradionecrosis in oral cancer after marginal mandibulectomy and radiotherapy
od: Collins, GS, i wsp.
Wydane: (2019)

A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes
od: Debray, T, i wsp.
Wydane: (2018)

Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model using multinomial logistic regression
od: Pate, A, i wsp.
Wydane: (2023)