Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34030086›Full record

ArticlePsychoneuroendocrinology2021

Censored data considerations and analytical approaches for salivary bioscience data.

Hedyeh Ahmadi, Douglas A Granger, Katrina R Hamilton, Clancy Blair, Jenna L Riis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychoneuroendocrinology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Hedyeh AhmadiInstitute for Interdisciplinary Salivary Bioscience Research, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA. Electronic address: hedyeha@uci.edu.
Douglas A GrangerInstitute for Interdisciplinary Salivary Bioscience Research, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA; Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA; Department of Acute and Chronic Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Salivary Bioscience Laboratory and Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Katrina R HamiltonInstitute for Interdisciplinary Salivary Bioscience Research, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Clancy BlairDepartment of Population Health and Department of Applied Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Jenna L RiisInstitute for Interdisciplinary Salivary Bioscience Research, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA; Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA. Electronic address: jriis@uci.edu.

Funding

Stress, Self-Regulation and Psychopathology in Middle ChildhoodR01HD081252 · NICHD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI BLAIR, CLANCY B · 2015 to 2019
$6.5M
Early Life Stress and the Environmental Origins of Disease: a Population-based Prospective Longitudinal Study of Children in Rural PovertyUG3OD023332 · OD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI BLAIR, CLANCY B · 2016 to 2017
$6.5M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD081252NIH HHS UG3 OD023332
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Left censoring in salivary bioscience data occurs when salivary analyte determinations fall below the lower limit of an assay's measurement range. Conventional statistical approaches for addressing censored values (i.e., recoding as missing, substituting or extrapolating values) may introduce systematic bias. While specialized censored data statistical approaches (i.e., Maximum Likelihood Estimation, Regression on Ordered Statistics, Kaplan-Meier, and general Tobit regression) are available, these methods are rarely implemented in biobehavioral studies that examine salivary biomeasures, and their application to salivary data analysis may be hindered by their sensitivity to skewed data distributions, outliers, and sample size. This study compares descriptive statistics, correlation coefficients, and regression parameter estimates generated via conventional and specialized censored data approaches using salivary C-reactive protein data. We assess differences in statistical estimates across approach and across two levels of censoring (9% and 15%) and examine the sensitivity of our results to sample size. Overall, findings were similar across conventional and censored data approaches, but the implementation of specialized censored data approaches was more efficient (i.e., required little manipulations to the raw analyte data) and appropriate. Based on our review of the findings, we outline preliminary recommendations to enable investigators to more efficiently and effectively reduce statistical bias when working with left-censored salivary biomeasure data.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalSalivaBiasC-Reactive ProteinHumansC-Reactive ProteinCensored dataC-reactive proteinSalivaStatistical analysisTobit regression

Identifiers

PMID34030086
PMCPMC8260151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.