Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies: The CHARMS Checklist
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 14 October 2014
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Medicine
- Vol. 11 (10) , e1001744
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001744
Abstract
Carl Moons and colleagues provide a checklist and background explanation for critically appraising and extracting data from systematic reviews of prognostic and diagnostic prediction modelling studies. Please see later in the article for the Editors' SummaryKeywords
This publication has 142 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effect of changes over time in the performance of a customized SAPS-II model on the quality of care assessmentIntensive Care Medicine, 2011
- Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaborationEuropean Journal of Epidemiology, 2011
- Performance of logistic regression modeling: beyond the number of events per variable, the role of data structureJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011
- Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkersStatistics in Medicine, 2010
- Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Evaluating Prediction Models (But Were Too Afraid to Ask)Urology, 2010
- Accuracy and Quality of Clinical Decision Rules for Syncope in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysisAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 2010
- External Validity of Risk Models: Use of Benchmark Values to Disentangle a Case-Mix Effect From Incorrect CoefficientsAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
- Reporting of prognostic studies of tumour markers: a review of published articles in relation to REMARK guidelinesBritish Journal of Cancer, 2009
- REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK)British Journal of Cancer, 2005