Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42452964›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology2026

Revisiting reliability and measurement precision: Towards a unified perspective.

Jimmy de la Torre, Klaas Sijtsma, Rodrigo Schames Kreitchmann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Jimmy de la TorreFaculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0893-3863
Klaas SijtsmaDepartment of Methodology and Statistics TSB, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4739-0574
Rodrigo Schames KreitchmannDepartment of Methodology of Behavioral Sciences, Faculty of Psychology, National University of Distance Education, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5199-9828

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article revisits the concepts of reliability and measurement precision across classical test theory (CTT), item response theory (IRT) and cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs), emphasizing their conceptual differences and proposing a unified framework. We show how continuous score estimators in CTT and IRT relate to mastery probabilities in CDMs through integration over proficiency estimator distributions relative to defined thresholds. Building on this link, we introduce reliability indices grounded in the coefficient of determination (

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalPsychometricsData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansReproducibility of Resultsclassical test modelscognitive diagnosis modelsitem response theoryreliability

Identifiers

PMID42452964
PMCPMC13679757

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.