Agreement Between Two Quantitative Measurement Methods When the Underlying Latent Trait Is Not Constant.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Patrick Taffé
{"title":"Agreement Between Two Quantitative Measurement Methods When the Underlying Latent Trait Is Not Constant.","authors":"Patrick Taffé","doi":"10.1002/sim.70164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Most statistical methods that have been developed to assess the agreement between two quantitative measurement methods have (implicitly) relied on the assumption of a constant \"individual\" latent trait. This might be inappropriate when the \"individual\" is not an object but a person. Therefore, the goal of this study was to extend the standard measurement error model to cope with this limit. Four different settings were investigated: first, where the true individual latent trait was constant; second, where it was variable but without exhibiting a time trend; third, where it followed a linear time trend; and fourth, where it exhibited an approximate linear time trend. Two competing methods to estimate the parameters of the general measurement error model were assessed: the GLS estimator of Sprent and the two-stage method of Taffé. It was found that the latter generally performed better than the former to estimate the bias. In addition, it can be used when there is only a single measurement per individual by one of the two measurement methods, which is not the case with the former method.</p>","PeriodicalId":21879,"journal":{"name":"Statistics in Medicine","volume":"44 15-17","pages":"e70164"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.70164","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most statistical methods that have been developed to assess the agreement between two quantitative measurement methods have (implicitly) relied on the assumption of a constant "individual" latent trait. This might be inappropriate when the "individual" is not an object but a person. Therefore, the goal of this study was to extend the standard measurement error model to cope with this limit. Four different settings were investigated: first, where the true individual latent trait was constant; second, where it was variable but without exhibiting a time trend; third, where it followed a linear time trend; and fourth, where it exhibited an approximate linear time trend. Two competing methods to estimate the parameters of the general measurement error model were assessed: the GLS estimator of Sprent and the two-stage method of Taffé. It was found that the latter generally performed better than the former to estimate the bias. In addition, it can be used when there is only a single measurement per individual by one of the two measurement methods, which is not the case with the former method.

潜在特质不恒定时两种定量测量方法的一致性。
大多数用于评估两种定量测量方法之间一致性的统计方法(隐含地)依赖于一个恒定的“个体”潜在特征的假设。当“individual”不是一个物体而是一个人时,这可能是不合适的。因此,本研究的目的是扩展标准测量误差模型以应对这一限制。研究了四种不同的设置:第一,真实个体潜在特质不变;第二,它是可变的,但没有表现出时间趋势;第三,它遵循线性时间趋势;第四,它表现出近似的线性时间趋势。评估了通用测量误差模型参数估计的两种相互竞争的方法:Sprent的GLS估计法和taff的两阶段法。结果发现,后者通常比前者在估计偏差方面表现得更好。此外,当两种测量方法中的一种只对每个个体进行一次测量时,也可以使用它,而前一种方法则不是这样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Statistics in Medicine
Statistics in Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
334
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal aims to influence practice in medicine and its associated sciences through the publication of papers on statistical and other quantitative methods. Papers will explain new methods and demonstrate their application, preferably through a substantive, real, motivating example or a comprehensive evaluation based on an illustrative example. Alternatively, papers will report on case-studies where creative use or technical generalizations of established methodology is directed towards a substantive application. Reviews of, and tutorials on, general topics relevant to the application of statistics to medicine will also be published. The main criteria for publication are appropriateness of the statistical methods to a particular medical problem and clarity of exposition. Papers with primarily mathematical content will be excluded. The journal aims to enhance communication between statisticians, clinicians and medical researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信