Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21953305›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2011

The impact of misclassification due to survey response fatigue on estimation and identifiability of treatment effects.

Brian L Egleston, Suzanne M Miller, Neal J Meropol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. An adapted scale to measure perceived TB and HIV stigma during household contact investigation.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brian L EglestonBiostatistics and Bioinformatics Facility, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA. brian.egleston@fccc.edu
Suzanne M Miller
Neal J Meropol
Fox Chase Cancer Center · USCase Western Reserve University · US

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI CHARNITA M. ZEIGLER-JOHNSON · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
PATIENT DECISION MARKING--PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIALSR01CA082085 · NCI · FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER · PI MEROPOL, NEAL J · 1998 to 2007
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927NCI NIH HHS P30 CA 06927NCI NIH HHS R01 CA082085NCI NIH HHS R01 CA82085
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Response fatigue can cause measurement error and misclassification problems in survey research. Questions asked later in a long survey are often prone to more measurement error or misclassification. The response given is a function of both the true response and participant response fatigue. We investigate the identifiability of survey order effects and their impact on estimators of treatment effects. The focus is on fatigue that affects a given answer to a question rather than fatigue that causes non-response and missing data. We consider linear, Gamma, and logistic models of response that incorporate both the true underlying response and the effect of question order. For continuous data, survey order effects have no impact on study power under a Gamma model. However, under a linear model that allows for convergence of responses to a common mean, the impact of fatigue on power will depend on how fatigue affects both the rate of mean convergence and the variance of responses. For binary data and for less than a 50% chance of a positive response, order effects cause study power to increase under a linear probability (risk difference) model but decrease under a logistic model. The results suggest that measures designed to reduce survey order effects might have unintended consequences. We present a data example that demonstrates the problem of survey order effects.

Indexed as

Treatment OutcomeBiasBiostatisticsCommunicationComputer-Assisted InstructionComputer SimulationData CollectionData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear ModelsLogistic ModelsMental FatigueRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID21953305
PMCPMC3552436
OpenAlexW2041646984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.