ArticlePsychometrika2016
Analysis of Multiple Partially Ordered Responses to Belief Items with Don't Know Option.
Article in Psychometrika, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost Comparison and Spending on Tobacco Products: Evidence From A Nationally Representative Sample of Adult E-cigarette Users.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- Two-part models for repeatedly measured ordinal data with "don't know" category.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- Longitudinal partially ordered data analysis for preclinical sarcopenia.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- Gleaning Information for Cognitive Operations from Don't Know Responses in Cognitive and Noncognitive Assessments.Multivariate behavioral researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding beliefs, values, and preferences of patients is a tenet of contemporary health sciences. This application was motivated by the analysis of multiple partially ordered set (poset) responses from an inventory on layman beliefs about diabetes. The partially ordered set arises because of two features in the data-first, the response options contain a Don't Know (DK) option, and second, there were two consecutive occasions of measurement. As predicted by the common sense model of illness, beliefs about diabetes were not necessarily stable across the two measurement occasions. Instead of analyzing the two occasions separately, we studied the joint responses across the occasions as a poset response. Few analytic methods exist for data structures other than ordered or nominal categories. Poset responses are routinely collapsed and then analyzed as either rank ordered or nominal data, leading to the loss of nuanced information that might be present within poset categories. In this paper we developed a general class of item response models for analyzing the poset data collected from the Common Sense Model of Diabetes Inventory. The inferential object of interest is the latent trait that indicates congruence of belief with the biomedical model. To apply an item response model to the poset diabetes inventory, we proved that a simple coding algorithm circumvents the requirement of writing new codes such that standard IRT software could be directly used for the purpose of item estimation and individual scoring. Simulation experiments were used to examine parameter recovery for the proposed poset model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.