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....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sawatzky, Richard, Ratner, Pamela A., Kopec, Jacek A., Wu, Amery D., Zumbo, Bruno D.
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