Skip to main content

Table 1 Numerical and graphical presentation of model (n = 47)

From: Reporting performance of prognostic models in cancer: a review

  % (n) articles
Statistical model used  
   Cox only 88 (41)
   Cox plus other (two RPA, one ANN) 6 (3)
   Other (one Weibull, one RPA, one unclear) 6 (3)
Assumption of proportional hazards tested† 21 (10)
Final prognostic model reported* 96 (45)
Regression coefficient reported** 72 (34)
Reproducibility of model development assessed†† 11 (5)
   Model with same variables, not same coefficients 9 (4)
   Model generating both new variables and coefficients 4 (2)
  1. † In three articles assumption of proportional hazards was not applicable as models used were RPA (recursive partitioning analysis) and ANN (artificial neural network).
  2. * Two articles did not report the final model
  3. ** Not applicable in two articles using RPA or ANN model
  4. †† One article used both methods to examine model reproducibility.