Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Guideline
. 2015 Jan 13;131(2):211-9.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.014508. Epub 2015 Jan 5.

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. The TRIPOD Group

Gary S Collins  1 , Johannes B Reitsma  2 , Douglas G Altman  2 , Karel G M Moons  2 ; TRIPOD Group
Collaborators, Affiliations
Free PMC article
Guideline

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. The TRIPOD Group

Gary S Collins et al. Circulation. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Background: Prediction models are developed to aid health care providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed.

Methods: The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the TRIPOD Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, health care professionals, and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of TRIPOD contributors.

Results: The resulting TRIPOD Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The TRIPOD Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The TRIPOD Statement is best used in conjunction with the TRIPOD explanation and elaboration document.

Conclusions: To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.tripod-statement.org).

Keywords: diagnosis; epidemiology; prognosis; research design; risk; statistics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Schematic representation of diagnostic and prognostic prediction modeling studies. The nature of the prediction in diagnosis is estimating the probability that a specific outcome or disease is present (or absent) within an individual, at this point in time—that is, the moment of prediction (T = 0). In prognosis, the prediction is about whether an individual will experience a specific event or outcome within a certain time period. In other words, in diagnostic prediction the interest is in principle a cross-sectional relationship, whereas prognostic prediction involves a longitudinal relationship. Nevertheless, in diagnostic modeling studies, for logistical reasons, a time window between predictor (index test) measurement and the reference standard is often necessary. Ideally, this interval should be as short as possible and without starting any treatment within this period.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Similarities and differences between diagnostic and prognostic prediction models.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Types of prediction model studies covered by the TRIPOD statement. D indicates development data and V, validation data.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? BMJ. 2009;338:b375. - PubMed
    1. Steyerberg EW. Clinical Prediction Models: A Practical Approach to Development, Validation, and Updating. New York: Springer; 2009.
    1. Dorresteijn JA, Visseren FL, Ridker PM, Wassink AM, Paynter NP, Steyerberg EW, van der Graaf Y, Cook NR. Estimating treatment effects for individual patients based on the results of randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5888. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hayward RA, Kent DM, Vijan S, Hofer TP. Multivariable risk prediction can greatly enhance the statistical power of clinical trial subgroup analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-18. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Riley RD, Hayden JA, Steyerberg EW, Moons KG, Abrams K, Kyzas PA, Malats N, Briggs A, Schroter S, Altman DG, Hemingway H PROGRESS Group. Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 2: prognostic factor research. PLoS Med. 2013;10:e1001380. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001380. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types