Radiomics quality score
The radiomics quality score, often abbreviated to RQS, is a score that assesses the characteristics and ultimately the quality of a radiomics study including the reporting of it. The score has thirty-six potential points given based on sixteen criteria, with a score of thirty-six indicating superlative quality.
Practical points
registering a study in a trial database before it begins increases RQS
calibrating features with phantoms on all scanners used increases RQS
the best quality studies will usually adhere to (TRIPOD) Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (guidelines including a checklist for studies developing or validating a prediction mode) and have a high RQS 1)
A study of Park et al. aimed to evaluate the quality of radiomics studies on brain metastases based on the radiomics quality score (RQS), (TRIPOD) Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis checklist, and The Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative (IBSI) guidelines.
PubMed MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched for articles on radiomics for evaluating brain metastases, published until February 2021. Of the 572 articles, 29 relevant original research articles were included and evaluated according to the RQS, TRIPOD checklist, and IBSI guidelines.
External validation was performed in only three studies (10.3%). The median RQS was 3.0 (range, -6 to 12), with a low basic adherence rate of 50.0%. The adherence rate was low in comparison to the “gold standard” (10.3%), stating the potential clinical utility (10.3%), performing the cut-off analysis (3.4%), reporting calibration statistics (6.9%), and providing open science and data (3.4%). None of the studies involved test-retest or phantom studies, prospective studies, or cost-effectiveness analyses. The overall rate of adherence to the TRIPOD checklist was 60.3% and low for reporting title (3.4%), blind assessment of outcome (0%), description of the handling of missing data (0%), and presentation of the full prediction model (0%). The majority of studies lacked pre-processing steps, with bias-field correction, isovoxel resampling, skull stripping, and gray-level discretization performed in only six (20.7%), nine (31.0%), four (3.8%), and four (13.8%) studies, respectively.
The overall scientific and reporting quality of radiomics studies on brain metastases published during the study period was insufficient. Radiomics studies should adhere to the radiomics quality score (RQS), (TRIPOD) Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis checklist, and The Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative (IBSI) guidelines. to facilitate the translation of radiomics into the clinical field 2).
The quality of radiomics studies for meningioma is insufficient. Acknowledgement of RQS, TRIPOD, and IBSI reporting guidelines may improve the quality of meningioma radiomics studies and enable their clinical application 3)
The quality of reporting of radiomics studies in neurooncology is currently insufficient. Validation is necessary using external dataset, and improvements need to be made to feature reproducibility, demonstrating clinical utility, pursuits of a higher level of evidence, and open science 4).
The overall scientific quality and reporting of radiomics studies is insufficient. Scientific improvements need to be made to feature reproducibility, analysis of clinical utility, and open science categories. Reporting of study objectives, blind assessment, sample size, and missing data is deemed to be necessary 5).