Skill Tracer
Skills › Scientific Agent Skills › clinical-decision-support › study_reporting.md

study_reporting.md

141 lines · skills/clinical-decision-support/references/study_reporting.md at 5f2bc03

Open on GitHub
1# Study Reporting and Appraisal
2
3Checked 2026-09-30.
4

Study Reporting and Appraisal

Checked 2026-09-30.

Raw lines 1 to 4
5## First Principle
6
7Choose by study purpose, design, and evaluation stage. A reporting guideline states what to report; it does not prove that the study was well designed, unbiased, clinically useful, safe, or effective.
8
9Use risk-of-bias/applicability tools separately and preserve human judgments.

First Principle

Choose by study purpose, design, and evaluation stage. A reporting guideline states what to report; it does not prove that the study was well designed, unbiased, clinically useful, safe, or effective.

Use risk-of-bias/applicability tools separately and preserve human judgments.

Raw lines 5 to 10
11## Selection Map
13| Study or artifact | Primary framework | Important companion |
14|---|---|---|
15| Observational cohort/case-control/cross-sectional | STROBE | RECORD for routinely collected data |
16| Prediction model development or evaluation | TRIPOD+AI | PROBAST+AI |
17| LLM development, tuning, or evaluation research | TRIPOD-LLM | Task- and design-specific reporting |
18| Tumor prognostic marker | REMARK | Appropriate risk-of-bias and assay guidance |
19| Diagnostic accuracy | STARD | STARD-AI when the index test uses AI |
20| Randomized AI intervention protocol | Current SPIRIT base | SPIRIT-AI extension |
21| Randomized AI intervention report | Current CONSORT base | CONSORT-AI extension |
22| Early-stage live AI support evaluation | DECIDE-AI | Design-specific guideline |
23| Evidence profile | GRADE | Design-specific risk-of-bias tools |

Selection Map

Study or artifactPrimary frameworkImportant companion
Observational cohort/case-control/cross-sectionalSTROBERECORD for routinely collected data
Prediction model development or evaluationTRIPOD+AIPROBAST+AI
LLM development, tuning, or evaluation researchTRIPOD-LLMTask- and design-specific reporting
Tumor prognostic markerREMARKAppropriate risk-of-bias and assay guidance
Diagnostic accuracySTARDSTARD-AI when the index test uses AI
Randomized AI intervention protocolCurrent SPIRIT baseSPIRIT-AI extension
Randomized AI intervention reportCurrent CONSORT baseCONSORT-AI extension
Early-stage live AI support evaluationDECIDE-AIDesign-specific guideline
Evidence profileGRADEDesign-specific risk-of-bias tools
Raw lines 11 to 24
25## Observational Data

Observational Data

Raw lines 25 to 26
27### STROBE
29STROBE addresses reporting of cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. Use the design-specific checklist and explanation material from the [STROBE site](https://www.strobe-statement.org/).

STROBE

STROBE addresses reporting of cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. Use the design-specific checklist and explanation material from the STROBE site.

Raw lines 27 to 30
31### RECORD
33RECORD extends STROBE for routinely collected health data such as administrative, EHR, primary-care surveillance, and registry data. It emphasizes code lists/algorithms, database linkage, selection, cleaning, and data-access transparency. See the [RECORD site](https://www.record-statement.org/).
35Neither framework authorizes this skill to read EHR rows.

RECORD

RECORD extends STROBE for routinely collected health data such as administrative, EHR, primary-care surveillance, and registry data. It emphasizes code lists/algorithms, database linkage, selection, cleaning, and data-access transparency. See the RECORD site.

Neither framework authorizes this skill to read EHR rows.

Raw lines 31 to 36
37## Prediction Models

Prediction Models

Raw lines 37 to 38
39### TRIPOD+AI
41[TRIPOD+AI](https://www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj-2023-078378), published April 16, 2024, updates reporting guidance for development and evaluation of clinical prediction models using regression or machine-learning methods. It primarily targets non-generative models.
43Report, at minimum:
45- intended use, target population, outcome, horizon, and setting;
46- data sources, eligibility, sampling, and preprocessing;
47- predictor/outcome definitions and timing;
48- missing data;
49- sample-size rationale;
50- full model specification or access;
51- internal-validation method;
52- discrimination and calibration with uncertainty;
53- external validation and transportability;
54- subgroup performance and fairness considerations;
55- intended user, presentation, and limitations.

TRIPOD+AI

TRIPOD+AI, published April 16, 2024, updates reporting guidance for development and evaluation of clinical prediction models using regression or machine-learning methods. It primarily targets non-generative models.

Report, at minimum:

  • intended use, target population, outcome, horizon, and setting;
  • data sources, eligibility, sampling, and preprocessing;
  • predictor/outcome definitions and timing;
  • missing data;
  • sample-size rationale;
  • full model specification or access;
  • internal-validation method;
  • discrimination and calibration with uncertainty;
  • external validation and transportability;
  • subgroup performance and fairness considerations;
  • intended user, presentation, and limitations.
Raw lines 39 to 56
57### TRIPOD-LLM
59For research documentation concerning LLM development, tuning, prompting, or evaluation, use [TRIPOD-LLM](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03425-5), published January 8, 2025. Its modular checklist depends on the research design and task. Record the model/version, prompts, evaluation setting, and human review; it is a reporting guideline, not a model-quality score. This does not add LLM calls, raw text handling, or care delivery to this skill.

TRIPOD-LLM

For research documentation concerning LLM development, tuning, prompting, or evaluation, use TRIPOD-LLM, published January 8, 2025. Its modular checklist depends on the research design and task. Record the model/version, prompts, evaluation setting, and human review; it is a reporting guideline, not a model-quality score. This does not add LLM calls, raw text handling, or care delivery to this skill.

Raw lines 57 to 60
61### PROBAST+AI
63[PROBAST+AI](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40127903), published March 24, 2025, replaces the original PROBAST for broad prediction-model assessment. It has two distinct parts:
65- **model development** — quality and applicability;
66- **model evaluation** — risk of bias and applicability.
68Both parts use four domains:
701. participants and data sources;
712. predictors;
723. outcome;
734. analysis.
75Applicability is assessed for participants/data sources, predictors, and outcome. Do not average signaling questions into a score. Domain and overall judgments require knowledgeable assessors and rationale.

PROBAST+AI

PROBAST+AI, published March 24, 2025, replaces the original PROBAST for broad prediction-model assessment. It has two distinct parts:

  • model development — quality and applicability;
  • model evaluation — risk of bias and applicability.

Both parts use four domains:

  1. participants and data sources;
  2. predictors;
  3. outcome;
  4. analysis.

Applicability is assessed for participants/data sources, predictors, and outcome. Do not average signaling questions into a score. Domain and overall judgments require knowledgeable assessors and rationale.

Raw lines 61 to 76
77## Biomarker Studies
79Use the FDA-NIH [BEST Glossary](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK338448/) (revised January 16, 2025) for terminology. Distinguish categories and roles:
81- diagnostic;
82- monitoring;
83- response, including pharmacodynamic and surrogate-endpoint biomarker roles;
84- multicomponent;
85- predictive;
86- prognostic;
87- safety;
88- susceptibility/risk.
90A biomarker is not itself a measure of how a person feels, functions, or survives. Analytical validation, clinical validation, and clinical utility are distinct.
92For tumor prognostic markers, use [REMARK](https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/reporting-recommendations-for-tumour-marker-prognostic-studies-remark). Report specimen handling, assay methods, prespecified hypotheses/cut points, participant flow, missing data, analysis, effect estimates, and validation.

Biomarker Studies

Use the FDA-NIH BEST Glossary (revised January 16, 2025) for terminology. Distinguish categories and roles:

  • diagnostic;
  • monitoring;
  • response, including pharmacodynamic and surrogate-endpoint biomarker roles;
  • multicomponent;
  • predictive;
  • prognostic;
  • safety;
  • susceptibility/risk.

A biomarker is not itself a measure of how a person feels, functions, or survives. Analytical validation, clinical validation, and clinical utility are distinct.

For tumor prognostic markers, use REMARK. Report specimen handling, assay methods, prespecified hypotheses/cut points, participant flow, missing data, analysis, effect estimates, and validation.

Raw lines 77 to 93
94## AI Diagnostic Accuracy
96[STARD-AI](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-025-03953-8) was published September 15, 2025. It adds AI-specific or modified items to STARD 2015 for diagnostic-accuracy studies, including:
98- dataset practices;
99- AI index-test description and evaluation;
100- algorithmic bias and fairness;
101- applicability and generalizability;
102- transparent participant flow and reference-standard handling.
104Use STARD-AI with STARD. The [July 13, 2026 author correction](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-026-04570-9) adds an omitted steering-committee author; it does not replace the checklist. Do not use it for a prognostic prediction model merely because the model returns a class.

AI Diagnostic Accuracy

STARD-AI was published September 15, 2025. It adds AI-specific or modified items to STARD 2015 for diagnostic-accuracy studies, including:

  • dataset practices;
  • AI index-test description and evaluation;
  • algorithmic bias and fairness;
  • applicability and generalizability;
  • transparent participant flow and reference-standard handling.

Use STARD-AI with STARD. The July 13, 2026 author correction adds an omitted steering-committee author; it does not replace the checklist. Do not use it for a prognostic prediction model merely because the model returns a class.

Raw lines 94 to 105
106## AI Trial Protocols and Reports
108[SPIRIT-AI](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1037-7) and [CONSORT-AI](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1034-x) were published September 9, 2020.
110- Use SPIRIT-AI for protocols evaluating an AI intervention.
111- Use CONSORT-AI for reports of randomized trials evaluating an AI intervention.
112- Apply them with the current generic [SPIRIT 2025](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40295741) or [CONSORT 2025](https://www.bmj.com/content/389/bmj-2024-081123) statement, respectively.
114The [official extension catalogue](https://www.consort-spirit.org/extensions) still groups these AI extensions under SPIRIT 2013 and CONSORT 2010. Crosswalk their AI-specific items to the 2025 base checklists by content; do not assume the old item numbers match or describe them as updated 2025 AI extensions.
116AI extensions emphasize the intervention version, input acquisition/quality handling, human-AI interaction, integration requirements, errors/failures, and analysis of performance.

AI Trial Protocols and Reports

SPIRIT-AI and CONSORT-AI were published September 9, 2020.

  • Use SPIRIT-AI for protocols evaluating an AI intervention.
  • Use CONSORT-AI for reports of randomized trials evaluating an AI intervention.
  • Apply them with the current generic SPIRIT 2025 or CONSORT 2025 statement, respectively.

The official extension catalogue still groups these AI extensions under SPIRIT 2013 and CONSORT 2010. Crosswalk their AI-specific items to the 2025 base checklists by content; do not assume the old item numbers match or describe them as updated 2025 AI extensions.

AI extensions emphasize the intervention version, input acquisition/quality handling, human-AI interaction, integration requirements, errors/failures, and analysis of performance.

Raw lines 106 to 117
118## Early Live Evaluation
120[DECIDE-AI](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01772-9), published May 18, 2022, covers early-stage live clinical evaluation of AI-based decision-support systems and includes human factors, workflow, safety, and iterative change reporting.
122Live evaluation affects real care and is outside this skill's execution boundary. Use the guideline only to understand documentation requirements. Such work requires an approved protocol, qualified investigators, safety oversight, validated systems, applicable authorization, and institutional governance.

Early Live Evaluation

DECIDE-AI, published May 18, 2022, covers early-stage live clinical evaluation of AI-based decision-support systems and includes human factors, workflow, safety, and iterative change reporting.

Live evaluation affects real care and is outside this skill's execution boundary. Use the guideline only to understand documentation requirements. Such work requires an approved protocol, qualified investigators, safety oversight, validated systems, applicable authorization, and institutional governance.

Raw lines 118 to 123
124## Cross-Cutting Reporting
126Always disclose:
128- prespecified versus exploratory work;
129- all evaluated outcomes and analyses, including negative results;
130- effect sizes and uncertainty;
131- missingness and exclusions;
132- conflicts, funding, and developer involvement;
133- version and data cut dates;
134- external validation;
135- subgroup representation and performance;
136- calibration and decision thresholds;
137- human-factors methods;
138- incidents, failures, drift, updates, and monitoring;
139- access to protocol, analysis plan, code, model, and data when lawful and feasible.
141Never state “reported according to” as proof of adherence without a completed checklist and human verification.

Cross-Cutting Reporting

Always disclose:

  • prespecified versus exploratory work;
  • all evaluated outcomes and analyses, including negative results;
  • effect sizes and uncertainty;
  • missingness and exclusions;
  • conflicts, funding, and developer involvement;
  • version and data cut dates;
  • external validation;
  • subgroup representation and performance;
  • calibration and decision thresholds;
  • human-factors methods;
  • incidents, failures, drift, updates, and monitoring;
  • access to protocol, analysis plan, code, model, and data when lawful and feasible.

Never state “reported according to” as proof of adherence without a completed checklist and human verification.

Raw lines 124 to 141