ArticleApplied psychological measurement2024
Using Interpretable Machine Learning for Differential Item Functioning Detection in Psychometric Tests.
Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2024. 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.
- DIF: Concepts, Measurement, and Impact in Patient-Focused Drug Development and Regulatory Decision-Making.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a novel method to investigate test fairness and differential item functioning combining psychometrics and machine learning. Test unfairness manifests itself in systematic and demographically imbalanced influences of confounding constructs on residual variances in psychometric modeling. Our method aims to account for resulting complex relationships between response patterns and demographic attributes. Specifically, it measures the importance of individual test items, and latent ability scores in comparison to a random baseline variable when predicting demographic characteristics. We conducted a simulation study to examine the functionality of our method under various conditions such as linear and complex impact, unfairness and varying number of factors, unfair items, and varying test length. We found that our method detects unfair items as reliably as Mantel-Haenszel statistics or logistic regression analyses but generalizes to multidimensional scales in a straight forward manner. To apply the method, we used random forests to predict migration backgrounds from ability scores and single items of an elementary school reading comprehension test. One item was found to be unfair according to all proposed decision criteria. Further analysis of the item's content provided plausible explanations for this finding. Analysis code is available at: https://osf.io/s57rw/?view_only=47a3564028d64758982730c6d9c6c547.
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.