ReviewDiagnostic and prognostic research2019
Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature.
Review in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
111 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- AI-Based Sepsis Prediction in Hospitalized Adults: Systematic Review, Subgroup Meta-Analysis, and Contextual Analysis of Clinical Burden.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Weighing the impact of evidence in orthopaedic trauma registries: a systematic review of national and international registry data.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Development and Validation of an Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence Risk Estimation Tool Incorporating Real-World Data and Evidence From Meta-Analyses: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Pooled it
- Number of Publications on New Clinical Prediction Models: A Bibliometric Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Pooled it
- Prognostic prediction models for adverse birth outcomes: A systematic review.Journal of global health · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Predictor Composition, Outcomes, Risk of Bias, and Validation of COVID-19 Prognostic Scores.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Pooled it
- SBC Guideline on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Cardiomyopathy of Chagas Disease - 2023.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2023Guideline
- Prediction models for post-thrombectomy brain edema in patients with acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Pooled it
- Methodological guidance for the evaluation and updating of clinical prediction models: a systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluating and Updating the IMPACT Model to Predict Outcomes in Two Contemporary North American Traumatic Brain Injury Cohorts.Journal of neurotrauma · 2025Trial
- Modifiable prognostic factors of high societal costs among people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders: a replication study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Trial
- User perceptions of machine learning models as decision support for colorectal cancer multidisciplinary team conferences (AID-SIM-2): a qualitative simulation study.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Recalibration and Validation of a Risk Scoring Tool to Predict Multidrug-ResistantOpen forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Predicting first-year kidney graft loss at the time of donor offer using machine learning and competing-risk analysis in a Latin American cohort.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Review
- An interpretable machine learning model for early risk stratification of medium-to-giant coronary artery aneurysm in Kawasaki disease: development and external validation.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Developing Clinical Decision (Support) Systems Combining the Scientific and Regulatory Perspective: European Insights on Challenges, Requirements, and Practical Guidance.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Evaluation and validation of a revised VetCompass clinical grading tool for heat-related illness in dogs.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Time-updated Prediction of Discharge Functional Independence in Patients with Stroke and Low Functional Independence Measure in a Convalescent Rehabilitation Ward: Comparison between Admission and 3-week Models.Physical therapy research · 2026Article
- Enhancing Recovery in Geriatric Spine Surgery: From Risk Prediction to Patient Preparation.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.