Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34413412›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

A machine learning approach for the factorization of psychometric data with application to the Delis Kaplan Executive Function System.

J A Camilleri, S B Eickhoff, S Weis, J Chen, J Amunts, A Sotiras, S Genon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

J A CamilleriInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7 Brain and Behaviour), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany. j.camilleri@fz-juelich.de.
S B EickhoffInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7 Brain and Behaviour), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
S WeisInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7 Brain and Behaviour), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
J ChenInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7 Brain and Behaviour), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
J AmuntsInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7 Brain and Behaviour), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
A SotirasMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Institute for Informatics, Washington University in Saint Louis, Saint Louis, USA.
S GenonInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7 Brain and Behaviour), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
Advanced machine learning algorithms that integrate multi-modal neuroimaging to quantify the heterogeneity in Alzheimer's DiseaseR01AG067103 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI SOTIRAS, ARISTEIDIS · 2021 to 2025
$2.8M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG067103NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While a replicability crisis has shaken psychological sciences, the replicability of multivariate approaches for psychometric data factorization has received little attention. In particular, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) is frequently promoted as the gold standard in psychological sciences. However, the application of EFA to executive functioning, a core concept in psychology and cognitive neuroscience, has led to divergent conceptual models. This heterogeneity severely limits the generalizability and replicability of findings. To tackle this issue, in this study, we propose to capitalize on a machine learning approach, OPNMF (Orthonormal Projective Non-Negative Factorization), and leverage internal cross-validation to promote generalizability to an independent dataset. We examined its application on the scores of 334 adults at the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS), while comparing to standard EFA and Principal Component Analysis (PCA). We further evaluated the replicability of the derived factorization across specific gender and age subsamples. Overall, OPNMF and PCA both converge towards a two-factor model as the best data-fit model. The derived factorization suggests a division between low-level and high-level executive functioning measures, a model further supported in subsamples. In contrast, EFA, highlighted a five-factor model which reflects the segregation of the D-KEFS battery into its main tasks while still clustering higher-level tasks together. However, this model was poorly supported in the subsamples. Thus, the parsimonious two-factors model revealed by OPNMF encompasses the more complex factorization yielded by EFA while enjoying higher generalizability. Hence, OPNMF provides a conceptually meaningful, technically robust, and generalizable factorization for psychometric tools.

Indexed as

Factor Analysis, StatisticalMachine LearningPsychometricsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsDatabases as TopicExecutive FunctionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrincipal Component AnalysisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34413412
PMCPMC8377093

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.