Background: Reporting of COVID-19 prognostic models frequently falls short of established standards. The TRIPOD checklist and its 2024 AI extension (TRIPOD + AI) provide a comprehensive framework for assessing reporting quality. We therefore evaluated and compared reporting completeness in conventional versus machine-learning models. Methods: Studies reporting the development, and internal and external validation of prognostic prediction models for COVID-19 using either conventional or machine learning-based algorithms were included. Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Epistemonikos.org, and Scopus (up to July 31, 2024). Studies using conventional statistical methods were evaluated under TRIPOD, while machine learning-based studies were assessed using TRIPOD + AI. Data extraction followed TRIPOD and TRIPOD + AI checklists, measuring adherence per article and per checklist item. The protocol was prospectively registered at the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/kg9yw ). Results: A total of 53 studies describing 71 prognostic models were identified. Overall, adherence to both guidelines was low, with significantly poorer compliance among machine learning-based studies (TRIPOD + AI) compared to conventional model studies (TRIPOD) (28.4% vs. 38.1%, 95% CI of difference: 4.1–15.4). No study fully adhered to abstract reporting requirements, and appropriate titles were included in only a minority of cases (29.0%, 95% CI: 16.1–46.6 for TRIPOD; 13.6%, 95% CI: 4.8–33.3 for TRIPOD + AI). Sample size calculations were not fully reported in any study. Reporting of methods and results sections was poor across both frameworks. Conclusion: Lower adherence among machine learning studies reflects the relatively recent publication of the TRIPOD + AI guidelines (April 2024), which postdate many of the included studies. Both conventional and machine learning-based prediction models showed insufficient reporting, with major gaps in model description and performance reporting. Greater compliance with reporting guidelines is critical to improving the clarity, reproducibility, and clinical value of prediction model research.

Background: The Inflammatory Bowel Disease-Disk (IBD-Disk) is a physician-administered tool that evaluates the functional status of patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). The aim of our study was to validate the content of the IBD-Disk in a Greek cohort of IBD patients. Methods: Two questionnaires [the IBD Disk and the IBD-Disability Index (IBD-DI)] were translated into Greek and administered to IBD patients at baseline visit, after 4 weeks and 6 months. Validation of the IBD Disk included measuring of concurrent validity, reproducibility, and internal consistency. Results: A total of 300 patients were included at baseline and 269 at follow-up. There was a good correlation between the total scores of the IBD-Disk and IBD-DI at baseline (Pearson correlation 0.87, p < 0.001). Reproducibility of the total IBD-Disk score was very good [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 (0.86–0.91)]. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha for all items achieved 0.90 (95%CI 0.88–0.92), demonstrating a very good homogeneity of the IBD-Disk items. Female gender and extraintestinal manifestations were significantly associated with a higher IBD-Disk total score. Conclusions: The Greek version of the IBD-Disk proved to be a reliable and valid tool in detecting and assessing IBD-related disability in a Greek cohort of IBD patients.

RRH: Rural and Remote Health. Published article number: 6985 - Perceived risk and pandemic response awareness in low-capacity public primary health care in Greece

Background: To investigate the correlation of colour vision, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and photostress recovery time test scores in visually impaired patients. Materials and methods: A total of 133 subjects were enroled and 133 eyes were examined. The pathological group consisted of 76 (57.1%) males with an average age of 68.0 (SD=13.2) and 57 (42.9%) females, with an average age of 68.1 (SD=15.2), Mann–Whitney U test was used to evaluate the differences in K-colour tests, HRR, visual acuity, Contrast Sensitivity test and photostress recovery time test between two different groups of severity. Results: Correlations were found among colour vision tests, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and photostress recovery time scores in eyes with age-related macular degeneration, with diabetic retinopathy, with optic nerve diseases, and various other retinal diseases (P<0.05). In patients with moderate-visual impairments. Conclusions: The colour vision test scores correlate with the scores of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and photostess recovery time test. It may be a useful clinical surrogate for functional vision.