OBJECTIVE: Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are clinician decision-making aids designed to improve the accuracy of a variety of decisions made during patient care. To our knowledge, there are no formally developed consensus-based guidelines designed to provide standards for the creation of CPRs. METHODS: The study used a 3-round Delphi method for consensus of a quality checklist initially developed based on recommendations derived from the literature. The 9 Delphi participants were randomly selected from the authors of peer-reviewed publications of prescriptive CPRs. RESULTS: During the 3 rounds, the Delphi participants modified the originally derived checklist and, based on a consensus standard, agreed upon a final 23-item checklist, which involved 4 constructs: (1) sample and participants, (2) outcome measures, (3) quality of tests and measures, and (4) statistical assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the checklist has potential for improving the design and reporting of future prescriptive CPRs. Copyright 2010 National University of Health Sciences. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are clinician decision-making aids designed to improve the accuracy of a variety of decisions made during patient care. To our knowledge, there are no formally developed consensus-based guidelines designed to provide standards for the creation of CPRs. METHODS: The study used a 3-round Delphi method for consensus of a quality checklist initially developed based on recommendations derived from the literature. The 9 Delphi participants were randomly selected from the authors of peer-reviewed publications of prescriptive CPRs. RESULTS: During the 3 rounds, the Delphi participants modified the originally derived checklist and, based on a consensus standard, agreed upon a final 23-item checklist, which involved 4 constructs: (1) sample and participants, (2) outcome measures, (3) quality of tests and measures, and (4) statistical assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the checklist has potential for improving the design and reporting of future prescriptive CPRs. Copyright 2010 National University of Health Sciences. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Bart G Pijls; Olaf M Dekkers; Saskia Middeldorp; Edward R Valstar; Huub J L van der Heide; Henrica M J Van der Linden-Van der Zwaag; Rob G H H Nelissen Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2011-07-22 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Benjamin W Y Lo; Hitoshi Fukuda; Yusuke Nishimura; Forough Farrokhyar; Lehana Thabane; Mitchell A H Levine Journal: Surg Neurol Int Date: 2015-08-11
Authors: Michael Harrison-Blount; Michelle Cullen; Christopher J Nester; Anita E Williams Journal: J Foot Ankle Res Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 2.303