Cargando…
The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis
BACKGROUND: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) utilizes latent variable measurement model parameters that are typically assumed to be equivalently applicable to all people. Biased latent variable scores may be obtained in samples that are heterogeneous with respect to a specified measurement model....
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4773251/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26930348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150563 |
_version_ | 1782418704325148672 |
---|---|
author | Sawatzky, Richard Ratner, Pamela A. Kopec, Jacek A. Wu, Amery D. Zumbo, Bruno D. |
author_facet | Sawatzky, Richard Ratner, Pamela A. Kopec, Jacek A. Wu, Amery D. Zumbo, Bruno D. |
author_sort | Sawatzky, Richard |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) utilizes latent variable measurement model parameters that are typically assumed to be equivalently applicable to all people. Biased latent variable scores may be obtained in samples that are heterogeneous with respect to a specified measurement model. We examined the implications of sample heterogeneity with respect to CAT-predicted patient-reported outcomes (PRO) scores for the measurement of pain. METHODS: A latent variable mixture modeling (LVMM) analysis was conducted using data collected from a heterogeneous sample of people in British Columbia, Canada, who were administered the 36 pain domain items of the CAT-5D-QOL. The fitted LVMM was then used to produce data for a simulation analysis. We evaluated bias by comparing the referent PRO scores of the LVMM with PRO scores predicted by a “conventional” CAT (ignoring heterogeneity) and a LVMM-based “mixture” CAT (accommodating heterogeneity). RESULTS: The LVMM analysis indicated support for three latent classes with class proportions of 0.25, 0.30 and 0.45, which suggests that the sample was heterogeneous. The simulation analyses revealed differences between the referent PRO scores and the PRO scores produced by the “conventional” CAT. The “mixture” CAT produced PRO scores that were nearly equivalent to the referent scores. CONCLUSION: Bias in PRO scores based on latent variable models may result when population heterogeneity is ignored. Improved accuracy could be obtained by using CATs that are parameterized using LVMM. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4773251 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47732512016-03-07 The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis Sawatzky, Richard Ratner, Pamela A. Kopec, Jacek A. Wu, Amery D. Zumbo, Bruno D. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) utilizes latent variable measurement model parameters that are typically assumed to be equivalently applicable to all people. Biased latent variable scores may be obtained in samples that are heterogeneous with respect to a specified measurement model. We examined the implications of sample heterogeneity with respect to CAT-predicted patient-reported outcomes (PRO) scores for the measurement of pain. METHODS: A latent variable mixture modeling (LVMM) analysis was conducted using data collected from a heterogeneous sample of people in British Columbia, Canada, who were administered the 36 pain domain items of the CAT-5D-QOL. The fitted LVMM was then used to produce data for a simulation analysis. We evaluated bias by comparing the referent PRO scores of the LVMM with PRO scores predicted by a “conventional” CAT (ignoring heterogeneity) and a LVMM-based “mixture” CAT (accommodating heterogeneity). RESULTS: The LVMM analysis indicated support for three latent classes with class proportions of 0.25, 0.30 and 0.45, which suggests that the sample was heterogeneous. The simulation analyses revealed differences between the referent PRO scores and the PRO scores produced by the “conventional” CAT. The “mixture” CAT produced PRO scores that were nearly equivalent to the referent scores. CONCLUSION: Bias in PRO scores based on latent variable models may result when population heterogeneity is ignored. Improved accuracy could be obtained by using CATs that are parameterized using LVMM. Public Library of Science 2016-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4773251/ /pubmed/26930348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150563 Text en © 2016 Sawatzky et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Sawatzky, Richard Ratner, Pamela A. Kopec, Jacek A. Wu, Amery D. Zumbo, Bruno D. The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis |
title | The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis |
title_full | The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis |
title_fullStr | The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis |
title_short | The Accuracy of Computerized Adaptive Testing in Heterogeneous Populations: A Mixture Item-Response Theory Analysis |
title_sort | accuracy of computerized adaptive testing in heterogeneous populations: a mixture item-response theory analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4773251/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26930348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150563 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sawatzkyrichard theaccuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT ratnerpamelaa theaccuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT kopecjaceka theaccuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT wuameryd theaccuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT zumbobrunod theaccuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT sawatzkyrichard accuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT ratnerpamelaa accuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT kopecjaceka accuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT wuameryd accuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis AT zumbobrunod accuracyofcomputerizedadaptivetestinginheterogeneouspopulationsamixtureitemresponsetheoryanalysis |