Cargando…
A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data
The logistic regression (LR) model for assessing differential item functioning (DIF) is highly dependent on the asymptotic sampling distributions. However, for rare events data, the maximum likelihood estimation method may be biased and the asymptotic distributions may not be reliable. In this study...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7060847/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32185193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1632350 |
_version_ | 1783504299152637952 |
---|---|
author | Faghih, Marjan Bagheri, Zahra Stevanovic, Dejan Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohhamad Taghi Jafari, Peyman |
author_facet | Faghih, Marjan Bagheri, Zahra Stevanovic, Dejan Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohhamad Taghi Jafari, Peyman |
author_sort | Faghih, Marjan |
collection | PubMed |
description | The logistic regression (LR) model for assessing differential item functioning (DIF) is highly dependent on the asymptotic sampling distributions. However, for rare events data, the maximum likelihood estimation method may be biased and the asymptotic distributions may not be reliable. In this study, the performance of the regular maximum likelihood (ML) estimation is compared with two bias correction methods including weighted logistic regression (WLR) and Firth's penalized maximum likelihood (PML) to assess DIF for imbalanced or rare events data. The power and type I error rate of the LR model for detecting DIF were investigated under different combinations of sample size, moderate and severe magnitudes of uniform DIF (DIF = 0.4 and 0.8), sample size ratio, number of items, and the imbalanced degree (τ). Indeed, as compared with WLR and for severe imbalanced degree (τ = 0.069), there were reductions of approximately 30% and 24% under DIF = 0.4 and 27% and 23% under DIF = 0.8 in the power of the PML and ML, respectively. The present study revealed that the WLR outperforms both the ML and PML estimation methods when logistic regression is used to evaluate DIF for imbalanced or rare events data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7060847 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70608472020-03-17 A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data Faghih, Marjan Bagheri, Zahra Stevanovic, Dejan Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohhamad Taghi Jafari, Peyman Biomed Res Int Research Article The logistic regression (LR) model for assessing differential item functioning (DIF) is highly dependent on the asymptotic sampling distributions. However, for rare events data, the maximum likelihood estimation method may be biased and the asymptotic distributions may not be reliable. In this study, the performance of the regular maximum likelihood (ML) estimation is compared with two bias correction methods including weighted logistic regression (WLR) and Firth's penalized maximum likelihood (PML) to assess DIF for imbalanced or rare events data. The power and type I error rate of the LR model for detecting DIF were investigated under different combinations of sample size, moderate and severe magnitudes of uniform DIF (DIF = 0.4 and 0.8), sample size ratio, number of items, and the imbalanced degree (τ). Indeed, as compared with WLR and for severe imbalanced degree (τ = 0.069), there were reductions of approximately 30% and 24% under DIF = 0.4 and 27% and 23% under DIF = 0.8 in the power of the PML and ML, respectively. The present study revealed that the WLR outperforms both the ML and PML estimation methods when logistic regression is used to evaluate DIF for imbalanced or rare events data. Hindawi 2020-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7060847/ /pubmed/32185193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1632350 Text en Copyright © 2020 Marjan Faghih et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Faghih, Marjan Bagheri, Zahra Stevanovic, Dejan Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohhamad Taghi Jafari, Peyman A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data |
title | A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data |
title_full | A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data |
title_fullStr | A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data |
title_short | A Comparative Study of the Bias Correction Methods for Differential Item Functioning Analysis in Logistic Regression with Rare Events Data |
title_sort | comparative study of the bias correction methods for differential item functioning analysis in logistic regression with rare events data |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7060847/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32185193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1632350 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT faghihmarjan acomparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT bagherizahra acomparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT stevanovicdejan acomparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT ayatollahiseyyedmohhamadtaghi acomparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT jafaripeyman acomparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT faghihmarjan comparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT bagherizahra comparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT stevanovicdejan comparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT ayatollahiseyyedmohhamadtaghi comparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata AT jafaripeyman comparativestudyofthebiascorrectionmethodsfordifferentialitemfunctioninganalysisinlogisticregressionwithrareeventsdata |