Review of study reporting guidelines for clinical studies using artificial intelligence in healthcare

  • Susan Cheng Shelmerdine*
  • , Owen J. Arthurs
  • , Alastair Denniston
  • , Neil J Sebire
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

High-quality research is essential in guiding evidence-based care, and should be reported in a way that is reproducible, transparent and where appropriate, provide sufficient detail for inclusion in future meta-analyses. Reporting guidelines for various study designs have been widely used for clinical (and preclinical) studies, consisting of checklists with a minimum set of points for inclusion. With the recent rise in volume of research using artificial intelligence (AI), additional factors need to be evaluated, which do not neatly conform to traditional reporting guidelines (eg, details relating to technical algorithm development). In this review, reporting guidelines are highlighted to promote awareness of essential content required for studies evaluating AI interventions in healthcare. These include published and in progress extensions to well-known reporting guidelines such as Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-AI (study protocols), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-AI (randomised controlled trials), Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-AI (diagnostic accuracy studies) and Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis-AI (prediction model studies). Additionally there are a number of guidelines that consider AI for health interventions more generally (eg, Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM), minimum information (MI)-CLAIM, MI for Medical AI Reporting) or address a specific element such as the ‘learning curve’ (Developmental and Exploratory Clinical Investigation of Decision-AI) . Economic evaluation of AI health interventions is not currently addressed, and may benefit from extension to an existing guideline. In the face of a rapid influx of studies of AI health interventions, reporting guidelines help ensure that investigators and those appraising studies consider both the well-recognised elements of good study design and reporting, while also adequately addressing new challenges posed by AI-specific elements.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere100385
Number of pages10
JournalBMJ Health and Care Informatics
Volume28
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Aug 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Keywords

  • BMJ health informatics
  • healthcare sector
  • medical informatics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Computer Science Applications
  • Health Informatics
  • Health Information Management

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Review of study reporting guidelines for clinical studies using artificial intelligence in healthcare'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this