Estimating racial and ethnic healthcare quality disparities using exploratory item response theory and latent class item response theory models.

IF 1.6 3区 数学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS
Sharon-Lise Normand, Katya Zelevinsky, Marcela Horvitz-Lennon
{"title":"Estimating racial and ethnic healthcare quality disparities using exploratory item response theory and latent class item response theory models.","authors":"Sharon-Lise Normand, Katya Zelevinsky, Marcela Horvitz-Lennon","doi":"10.1093/jrsssa/qnaf033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Healthcare quality metrics refer to a variety of measures used to characterize what should have been done or not done for a patient or the health consequences of what was or was not done. When estimating healthcare quality, many metrics are measured and combined to provide an overall estimate either at the patient level or at higher levels, such as the provider organization or insurer. Racial and ethnic disparities are defined as the mean difference in quality between minorities and Whites not justified by underlying health conditions or patient preferences. Several statistical features of healthcare quality data have been ignored: quality is a theoretical construct not directly observable; quality metrics are measured on different scales or, if measured on the same scale, have different baseline rates; the construct may be multidimensional; and metrics are correlated within-individuals. Balancing health differences across race and ethnicity groups is challenging due to confounding. We provide an approach addressing these features, utilizing exploratory multidimensional item response theory (IRT) models and latent class IRT models to estimate quality, and optimization-based matching to adjust for confounding among the race and ethnicity groups. Quality metrics measured on 93,000 adults with schizophrenia residing in five US states illustrate approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":49983,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A-Statistics in Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12377680/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A-Statistics in Society","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jrsssa/qnaf033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Healthcare quality metrics refer to a variety of measures used to characterize what should have been done or not done for a patient or the health consequences of what was or was not done. When estimating healthcare quality, many metrics are measured and combined to provide an overall estimate either at the patient level or at higher levels, such as the provider organization or insurer. Racial and ethnic disparities are defined as the mean difference in quality between minorities and Whites not justified by underlying health conditions or patient preferences. Several statistical features of healthcare quality data have been ignored: quality is a theoretical construct not directly observable; quality metrics are measured on different scales or, if measured on the same scale, have different baseline rates; the construct may be multidimensional; and metrics are correlated within-individuals. Balancing health differences across race and ethnicity groups is challenging due to confounding. We provide an approach addressing these features, utilizing exploratory multidimensional item response theory (IRT) models and latent class IRT models to estimate quality, and optimization-based matching to adjust for confounding among the race and ethnicity groups. Quality metrics measured on 93,000 adults with schizophrenia residing in five US states illustrate approaches.

使用探索性项目反应理论和潜在类别项目反应理论模型估计种族和民族医疗保健质量差异。
医疗保健质量指标是指用于描述应该为患者做什么或不做什么,或做什么或不做什么对健康造成的后果的各种度量。在评估医疗保健质量时,要测量并组合许多指标,以提供患者级别或更高级别(如提供商组织或保险公司)的总体评估。种族和民族差异被定义为少数民族和白人之间的平均质量差异,而不是由潜在的健康状况或患者偏好来证明。医疗质量数据的几个统计特征被忽视了:质量是一个不能直接观察到的理论结构;在不同的尺度上测量质量度量,或者,如果在相同的尺度上测量,有不同的基线率;这个结构可能是多维的;指标在个体内部是相关的。由于混淆,平衡种族和族裔群体之间的健康差异具有挑战性。我们提供了一种解决这些特征的方法,利用探索性多维项目反应理论(IRT)模型和潜在类别IRT模型来估计质量,并基于优化的匹配来调整种族和民族群体之间的混淆。对居住在美国五个州的93,000名精神分裂症患者进行的质量指标测量说明了方法。
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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.00%
发文量
136
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Series A (Statistics in Society) publishes high quality papers that demonstrate how statistical thinking, design and analyses play a vital role in all walks of life and benefit society in general. There is no restriction on subject-matter: any interesting, topical and revelatory applications of statistics are welcome. For example, important applications of statistical and related data science methodology in medicine, business and commerce, industry, economics and finance, education and teaching, physical and biomedical sciences, the environment, the law, government and politics, demography, psychology, sociology and sport all fall within the journal''s remit. The journal is therefore aimed at a wide statistical audience and at professional statisticians in particular. Its emphasis is on well-written and clearly reasoned quantitative approaches to problems in the real world rather than the exposition of technical detail. Thus, although the methodological basis of papers must be sound and adequately explained, methodology per se should not be the main focus of a Series A paper. Of particular interest are papers on topical or contentious statistical issues, papers which give reviews or exposés of current statistical concerns and papers which demonstrate how appropriate statistical thinking has contributed to our understanding of important substantive questions. Historical, professional and biographical contributions are also welcome, as are discussions of methods of data collection and of ethical issues, provided that all such papers have substantial statistical relevance.
×
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