ReviewBMJ open2025
Design aspects for prognostic factor studies.
Review in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Preoperative inflammation-based biomarkers and postoperative pulmonary complications after lung resection for lung cancer: a systematic review with selective exploratory quantitative synthesis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Independent Prognostic Factors for Predicting Wound Healing in People With Venous Leg Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair SocietyPooled it
- Tumor-educated platelets in cancer diagnostics and prognostics: A critical appraisal and roadmap for clinical translation.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Prognostic factor research: why it matters in orthopaedics and how we do it better.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Narrative review of the development of an ischaemic heart disease prognostic scoring tool (i-IHD score) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Malaysia.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prognostic research is clinically relevant and ultimately facilitates stratified medicine. However, its quality and output are limited. More guidance is needed to improve understanding and thus quality. On behalf of the topic group 'TG5: study design' of the STRATOS initiative and for the general readership, this article describes key concepts and issues for prognostic factor studies, a sub-area of prognosis research. After providing a general overview on prognosis research, the article covers aspects such as aims, estimands and designs of prognostic factor studies, highlighting standards and current practice. Focusing on prognostic factor studies that assess a single factor at a time and a binary outcome, this article is complemented by a glossary of terms and a list of general aspects to consider in prognostic factor studies.
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.