Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Most clinical specialties have a plethora of studies that develop or validate one or more prediction models, for example, to inform diagnosis or prognosis. Having many prediction model studies in a particular clinical field motivates the need for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, to evaluate and summarise the overall evidence available from prediction model studies, in particular about the predictive performance of existing models. Such reviews are fast emerging, and should be reported completely, transparently, and accurately. To help ensure this type of reporting, this article describes a new reporting guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of prediction model research.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Kym I E Snell
Brooke Levis
Johanna AAG Damen
BMJ
University of Oxford
Utrecht University
University of Birmingham
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Snell et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69effa7dbce9831ba4f73b94 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-073538