ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018
Computerized adaptive testing with decision regression trees: an alternative to item response theory for quality of life measurement in multiple sclerosis.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of machine learning in developing non-magnetic resonance imaging based biomarkers for multiple sclerosis: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Pooled it
- Recursive Partitioning vs Computerized Adaptive Testing to Reduce the Burden of Health Assessments in Cleft Lip and/or Palate: Comparative Simulation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- The Patient-Reported Experience Measure for Improving qUality of care in Mental health (PREMIUM) project in France: study protocol for the development and implementation strategy.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Improving the Measures of Phonological Ability in the Russian Language: IRT and CART Modeling Application.Reading research quarterlyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to propose an alternative approach to item response theory (IRT) in the development of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) in quality of life (QoL) for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). This approach relied on decision regression trees (DRTs). A comparison with IRT was undertaken based on precision and validity properties. MATERIALS AND
methodsDRT- and IRT-based CATs were applied on items from a unidi-mensional item bank measuring QoL related to mental health in MS. The DRT-based approach consisted of CAT simulations based on a minsplit parameter that defines the minimal size of nodes in a tree. The IRT-based approach consisted of CAT simulations based on a specified level of measurement precision. The best CAT simulation showed the lowest number of items and the best levels of precision. Validity of the CAT was examined using sociodemographic, clinical and QoL data.
resultsCAT simulations were performed using the responses of 1,992 MS patients. The DRT-based CAT algorithm with minsplit = 10 was the most satisfactory model, superior to the best IRT-based CAT algorithm. This CAT administered an average of nine items and showed satisfactory precision indicators (R = 0.98, root mean square error [RMSE] = 0.18). The DRT-based CAT showed convergent validity as its score correlated significantly with other QoL scores and showed satisfactory discriminant validity.
conclusionWe presented a new adaptive testing algorithm based on DRT, which has equivalent level of performance to IRT-based approach. The use of DRT is a natural and intuitive way to develop CAT, and this approach may be an alternative to IRT.
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.