Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Apr;26(4):255-9.
doi: 10.1007/s10654-011-9552-y.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies: the GRIPS statement

A Cecile J W Janssens  1 , John P A Ioannidis, Cornelia M van Duijn, Julian Little, Muin J Khoury; GRIPS Group
Collaborators, Affiliations

Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies: the GRIPS statement

A Cecile J W Janssens et al. Eur J Epidemiol. 2011 Apr.

Abstract

The rapid and continuing progress in gene discovery for complex diseases is fueling interest in the potential application of genetic risk models for clinical and public health practice. The number of studies assessing the predictive ability is steadily increasing, but the quality and completeness of reporting varies. A multidisciplinary workshop sponsored by the Human Genome Epidemiology Network developed a checklist of 25 items recommended for strengthening the reporting of Genetic RIsk Prediction Studies (GRIPS), building on the principles established by prior reporting guidelines. These recommendations aim to enhance the transparency of study reporting, and thereby to improve the synthesis and application of information from multiple studies that might differ in design, conduct, or analysis. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Khoury MJ, Gwinn M, Yoon PW, Dowling N, Moore CA, et al. The continuum of translation research in genomic medicine: how can we accelerate the appropriate integration of human genome discoveries into health care and disease prevention? Genet Med. 2007;9:665–674. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e31815699d0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hlatky MA, Greenland P, Arnett DK, Ballantyne CM, Criqui MH, et al. Criteria for evaluation of novel markers of cardiovascular risk: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2009;119:2408–2416. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.192278. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kyzas PA, Denaxa-Kyza D, Ioannidis JP. Quality of reporting of cancer prognostic marker studies: association with reported prognostic effect. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:236–243. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djk032. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kyzas PA, Loizou KT, Ioannidis JP. Selective reporting biases in cancer prognostic factor studies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1043–1055. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dji184. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, et al. REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK) Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2005;2:416–422. doi: 10.1038/ncponc0252. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types