ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2026
Data pipeline quality: development and validation of a quality assessment tool for data-driven algorithms and artificial intelligence in healthcare.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop and validate a tool for standardised quality assessment of data-driven algorithms in healthcare, focusing on the underlying data pipeline.
methodsData Assessment Tool for Algorithm Critical Appraisal and Robust Evidence (DATA-CARE) was iteratively developed from the established Quality In Prognosis Studies framework, selected after reviewing 10 existing quality assessment tools for observational and artificial intelligence studies. DATA-CARE evaluates five quality domains of the data pipeline: study population, data, algorithm, outcome and report transparency. Each domain comprises three to five quality criteria. With a total score of 75 points, study quality is categorised as low (<45), moderate (45-59) or high (≥60). DATA-CARE was validated during a systematic review on data-driven algorithms using continuous physiological monitoring data within the paediatric intensive care unit. Two independent reviewers performed quality assessment using DATA-CARE of included studies. Tool validation was evaluated using inter-rater agreement and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsDATA-CARE demonstrated robust inter-rater agreement (93.5%) with ICC 0.98 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). Of 3858 screened studies, 31 were reviewed in the use case, describing diverse algorithms. Studies were predominantly low (32.3%) to moderate (41.9%) and sporadically (25.8%) high quality. DISCUSSION: Predominance of low-to-moderate quality studies reveals critical barriers to clinical implementation of data-driven algorithms, including low quality data capture and processing, lacking validation strategies and non-transparent reporting of findings.
conclusionsDATA-CARE allows standardised and reliable critical appraisal for a wide variety of algorithms, addressing current gaps in standardised and reproducible algorithm development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.