ArticlePloS one2023
Generalized measurement error: Intrinsic and incidental measurement error.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, we generalize the notion of measurement error on deterministic sample datasets to accommodate sample data that are random-variable-valued. This leads to the formulation of two distinct kinds of measurement error: intrinsic measurement error, and incidental measurement error. Incidental measurement error will be recognized as the traditional kind that arises from a set of deterministic sample measurements, and upon which the traditional measurement error modelling literature is based, while intrinsic measurement error reflects some subjective quality of either the measurement tool or the measurand itself. We define calibrating conditions that generalize common and classical types of measurement error models to this broader measurement domain, and explain how the notion of generalized Berkson error in particular mathematicizes what it means to be an expert assessor or rater for a measurement process. We then explore how classical point estimation, inference, and likelihood theory can be generalized to accommodate sample data composed of generic random-variable-valued measurements.
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.