MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412810783 · doi:10.12771/emj.2025.00668

TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods: a Korean translation

2025· article· en· W4412810783 on OpenAlexafffund
Gary S. Collins, Karel G.M. Moons, Paula Dhiman, Richard D Riley, Andrew L. Beam, Ben Van Calster, Marzyeh Ghassemi, Xiaoxuan Liu, Johannes B. Reitsma, Maarten van Smeden, Anne‐Laure Boulesteix, Jennifer Camaradou, Leo Anthony Celi, Spiros Denaxas, Alastair K. Denniston, Ben Glocker, Robert M. Golub, Hugh Harvey, Georg Heinze, Michael M. Hoffman, André Pascal Kengne, Emily Lam, Naomi Lee, Elizabeth Loder, Lena Maier‐Hein, Bilal A. Mateen, Melissa D. McCradden, Lauren Oakden‐Rayner, Johan Ordish, Richard Parnell, Sherri Rose, Karandeep Singh, Laure Wynants, Patrícia Logullo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Ewha Medical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteHospital for Sick ChildrenPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersVlaamse regeringUniversity of Cape TownKU LeuvenUniversitair Medisch Centrum UtrechtUniversität WienUniversity of TorontoUniversity College LondonImperial College LondonHospital for Sick ChildrenNorthwestern UniversityUniversity of WarwickDepartment of Health and Social CareCancer Research UKFeinberg School of MedicineMedizinische Universität WienMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUK Research and InnovationUniversity of OxfordNational Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekWellcome Trust
KeywordsTripod (photography)Statement (logic)Computer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceRegressionTranslation (biology)StatisticsEngineeringMathematicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

최근 인공지능(AI) 방법, 특히 머신러닝의 발전에 따라 예측 모델 개발에 대한 관심과 투자 규모가 크게 증가하고 있다.예측 모델 연구가 실제 사용자에게 가치 있게 활용되기 위해서는, 연구자가 왜 연구를 수행했는지, 무엇을 했는지, 그리고 어떤 결과를 얻었는지를 투명하고 완전하며 정확하게 기술해야 한다.TRIPOD 지침의 개정판은 AI 방법을 적용한 예측 모델 연구 전반을 일관성 있게 안내하고, 회귀 분석이든 머신러닝이든 적용 방법에 관계없이 모두를 아우르는 지침을 제공한다.TRIPOD+AI 지침은 27개 항목의 체크리스트, 각 항목별 보고 권고사항을 상세히 설명하는 확장 체크리스트, 그리고 13개 항목의 초록 전용 TRIPOD+AI 체크리스트로 구성된다

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.185
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.185
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.047

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.571
GPT teacher head0.602
Teacher spread0.030 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Ewha Medical JournalSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207