PROBAST+AI: an updated quality, risk of bias, and applicability assessment tool for prediction models using regression or artificial intelligence methods

The Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) is used to assess the quality, risk of bias, and applicability of prediction models or algorithms and of prediction model/algorithm studies. Since PROBAST’s introduction in 2019, much progress has been made in the methodology for prediction modelling and in the use of artificial intelligence, including machine learning, techniques. An update to PROBAST-2019 is thus needed. This article describes the development of PROBAST+AI. PROBAST+AI consists of two distinctive parts: model development and model evaluation. For model development, PROBAST+AI users assess quality and applicability using 16 targeted signalling questions. For model evaluation, PROBAST+AI users assess the risk of bias and applicability using 18 targeted signalling questions. Both parts contain four domains: participants and data sources, predictors, outcome, and analysis. Applicability of the prediction model is rated for the participants and data sources, predictors, and outcome domains. PROBAST+AI may replace the original PROBAST tool and allows all key stakeholders (eg, model developers, AI companies, researchers, editors, reviewers, healthcare professionals, guideline developers, and policy organisations) to examine the quality, risk of bias, and applicability of any type of prediction model in the healthcare sector, irrespective of whether regression modelling or AI techniques are used.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ
Published
2025-03-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-082505
Citations
208
Primary Topic
Machine Learning in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
516.04

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

PROBAST+AI: an updated quality, risk of bias, and applicability assessment tool for prediction models using regression or artificial intelligence methods

Constanza L. Andaur Navarro, Karandeep Singh, Johannes B. Reitsma, André Pascal Kengne et al.
208 citations
BMJ
Machine Learning in Healthcare
516.04
article

PROBAST+AI: an updated quality, risk of bias, and applicability assessment tool for prediction models using regression or artificial intelligence methods

Constanza L. Andaur Navarro, Karandeep Singh, Johannes B. Reitsma, André Pascal Kengne, Patrícia Logullo, Lena Maier‐Hein, Leo Anthony Celi, Daniel Shu Wei Ting, Georg Heinze, Richard D Riley, Xiaoxuan Liu, Lotty Hooft, Bada Yang, Paula Dhiman, Professor Gary S. Collins, Melissa D. McCradden, Johanna AAG Damen, Maarten van Smeden, Lauren Oakden‐Rayner, Laure Wynants, Marzyeh Ghassemi, Spiros Denaxas, Alastair Keith Denniston, Andrew L. Beam, Karel G.M. Moons, Ben Van Calster, T. K. Kaul, Nan Liu
article en
208 citations

Abstract

The Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) is used to assess the quality, risk of bias, and applicability of prediction models or algorithms and of prediction model/algorithm studies. Since PROBAST’s introduction in 2019, much progress has been made in the methodology for prediction modelling and in the use of artificial intelligence, including machine learning, techniques. An update to PROBAST-2019 is thus needed. This article describes the development of PROBAST+AI. PROBAST+AI consists of two distinctive parts: model development and model evaluation. For model development, PROBAST+AI users assess quality and applicability using 16 targeted signalling questions. For model evaluation, PROBAST+AI users assess the risk of bias and applicability using 18 targeted signalling questions. Both parts contain four domains: participants and data sources, predictors, outcome, and analysis. Applicability of the prediction model is rated for the participants and data sources, predictors, and outcome domains. PROBAST+AI may replace the original PROBAST tool and allows all key stakeholders (eg, model developers, AI companies, researchers, editors, reviewers, healthcare professionals, guideline developers, and policy organisations) to examine the quality, risk of bias, and applicability of any type of prediction model in the healthcare sector, irrespective of whether regression modelling or AI techniques are used.

BMJVol. 388
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Harvard University (US), University of Cape Town (ZA), German Cancer Research Center (DE), Utrecht University (NL), Heidelberg University (DE), University of Michigan (US), Hospital for Sick Children (CA), Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre (GB), University Medical Center Utrecht (NL), University College Birmingham (GB), British Heart Foundation (GB), Maastricht University (NL), University of Oxford (GB), National Center for Tumor Diseases (DE), Duke-NUS Medical School (SG), Australian Centre for Robotic Vision (AU), NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (GB), University College London (GB), The University of Adelaide (AU), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US), Medical University of Vienna (AT), University of Birmingham (GB), KU Leuven (BE)
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Machine Learning in Healthcare
516.04
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.