Observational studyJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2020
Performance of longitudinal item response theory models in shortened or partial assessments.
Observational study in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The longitudinal structure of cognition in the ABCD study and associations with neural function and psychopathology: A Bayesian probabilistic principal components analysis.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Item Response Modeling and Artificial Neural Network for Differentiation of Parkinson's Patients and Subjects Without Evidence of Dopaminergic Deficit.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Increasing Sensitivity in Patient-Reported MDS-UPDRS Items for Predicting Medication Initiation in Early PD.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Article
- Sparse item testing of clinical scales in neurology trials to alleviate burden to patients.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Item performance of the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia in rare and ultra-rare genetic ataxias.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024Article
- Comparison of Two Methods for Determining Item Characteristic Functions and Latent Variable Time-Course for Pharmacometric Item Response Models.The AAPS journal · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the effect of erenumab on migraine-specific questionnaire in patients with chronic and episodic migraine.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
- Using Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Parts 2 and 3 Simultaneously: Combining the Patient Voice with Clinician Ratings.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2023Article
- Application of longitudinal item response theory models to modeling Parkinson's disease progression.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2022Article
- Dissecting the Domains of Parkinson's Disease: Insights from Longitudinal Item Response Theory Modeling.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2022Article
- Novel Approach to Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Monitoring in Clinical Trials: Longitudinal Item Response Theory Models.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This work evaluates the performance of longitudinal item response (IR) theory models in shortened assessments using an existing model for part II and III of the MDS-UPDRS score. Based on the item information content, the assessment was reduced by removal of items in multiple increments and the models' ability to recover the item characteristics of the remaining items at each level was evaluated. This evaluation was done for both simulated and real data. The metric of comparison in both cases was the item information function. For real data, the impact of shortening on the estimated disease progression and drug effect was also studied. In the simulated data setting, the item characteristics did not differ between the full and the shortened assessments down to the lowest level of information remaining; indicating a considerable independence between items. In contrast when reducing the assessment in a real data setting, a substantial change in item information was observed for some of the items. Disease progression and drug effect estimates also decreased in the reduced assessments. These changes indicate a shift in the measured construct of the shortened assessment and warrant caution when comparing results from a partial assessment with results from the full assessment.
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.