Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39166184›Full record

ArticleApplied psychological measurement2024

Item Response Modeling of Clinical Instruments With Filter Questions: Disentangling Symptom Presence and Severity.

Brooke E Magnus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Brooke E MagnusBoston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6905-972X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical instruments that use a filter/follow-up response format often produce data with excess zeros, especially when administered to nonclinical samples. When the unidimensional graded response model (GRM) is then fit to these data, parameter estimates and scale scores tend to suggest that the instrument measures individual differences only among individuals with severe levels of the psychopathology. In such scenarios, alternative item response models that explicitly account for excess zeros may be more appropriate. The multivariate hurdle graded response model (MH-GRM), which has been previously proposed for handling zero-inflated questionnaire data, includes two latent variables: susceptibility, which underlies responses to the filter question, and severity, which underlies responses to the follow-up question. Using both simulated and empirical data, the current research shows that compared to unidimensional GRMs, the MH-GRM is better able to capture individual differences across a wider range of psychopathology, and that when unidimensional GRMs are fit to data from questionnaires that include filter questions, individual differences at the lower end of the severity continuum largely go unmeasured. Practical implications are discussed.

Indexed as

clinical assessmentfilter questionsitem response theorypsychometricszero inflation

Identifiers

PMID39166184
PMCPMC11331747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.