比较确定药物计量学项目反应模型的项目特征函数和潜在变量时间历程的两种方法

Leticia Arrington, Mats O. Karlsson
{"title":"比较确定药物计量学项目反应模型的项目特征函数和潜在变量时间历程的两种方法","authors":"Leticia Arrington, Mats O. Karlsson","doi":"10.1208/s12248-023-00883-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There are examples in the literature demonstrating different approaches to defining the item characteristic functions (ICF) and characterizing the latent variable time-course within a pharmacometrics item response theory (IRT) framework. One such method estimates both the ICF and latent variable time-course simultaneously, and another method establishes the ICF first then models the latent variable directly. To date, a direct comparison of the “simultaneous” and “sequential” methodologies described in this work has not yet been systematically investigated. Item parameters from a graded response IRT model developed from Parkinson’s Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI) study data were used as simulation parameters. Each method was evaluated under the following conditions: (i) with and without drug effect and (ii) slow progression rate with smaller sample size and rapid progression rate with larger sample size. Overall, the methods performed similarly, with low bias and good precision for key parameters and hypothesis testing for drug effect. The ICF parameters were well determined when the model was correctly specified, with an increase in precision in the scenario with rapid progression. In terms of drug effect, both methods had large estimation bias for the slow progression rate; however, this bias can be considered small relative to overall progression rate. Both methods demonstrated type 1 error control and similar discrimination between model with and without drug effect. The simultaneous method was slightly more precise than the sequential method while the sequential method was more robust towards longitudinal model misspecification and offers practical advantages in model building.</p>","PeriodicalId":501692,"journal":{"name":"The AAPS Journal","volume":"96 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Two Methods for Determining Item Characteristic Functions and Latent Variable Time-Course for Pharmacometric Item Response Models\",\"authors\":\"Leticia Arrington, Mats O. Karlsson\",\"doi\":\"10.1208/s12248-023-00883-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>There are examples in the literature demonstrating different approaches to defining the item characteristic functions (ICF) and characterizing the latent variable time-course within a pharmacometrics item response theory (IRT) framework. One such method estimates both the ICF and latent variable time-course simultaneously, and another method establishes the ICF first then models the latent variable directly. To date, a direct comparison of the “simultaneous” and “sequential” methodologies described in this work has not yet been systematically investigated. Item parameters from a graded response IRT model developed from Parkinson’s Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI) study data were used as simulation parameters. Each method was evaluated under the following conditions: (i) with and without drug effect and (ii) slow progression rate with smaller sample size and rapid progression rate with larger sample size. Overall, the methods performed similarly, with low bias and good precision for key parameters and hypothesis testing for drug effect. The ICF parameters were well determined when the model was correctly specified, with an increase in precision in the scenario with rapid progression. In terms of drug effect, both methods had large estimation bias for the slow progression rate; however, this bias can be considered small relative to overall progression rate. Both methods demonstrated type 1 error control and similar discrimination between model with and without drug effect. The simultaneous method was slightly more precise than the sequential method while the sequential method was more robust towards longitudinal model misspecification and offers practical advantages in model building.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The AAPS Journal\",\"volume\":\"96 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The AAPS Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-023-00883-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The AAPS Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-023-00883-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文献中的一些实例展示了在药物计量学项目反应理论(IRT)框架内定义项目特征函数(ICF)和描述潜变量时程的不同方法。其中一种方法是同时估计 ICF 和潜变量时程,另一种方法是先建立 ICF,然后直接建立潜变量模型。迄今为止,尚未对本研究中描述的 "同步 "和 "顺序 "方法进行直接比较。根据帕金森病进展标志倡议(PPMI)研究数据开发的分级反应 IRT 模型中的项目参数被用作模拟参数。在以下条件下对每种方法进行了评估:(i) 有药物效应和无药物效应;(ii) 样本量较少的缓慢进展率和样本量较大的快速进展率。总体而言,这些方法的性能相似,关键参数和药物效应假设检验的偏差小、精度高。在正确指定模型的情况下,ICF 参数得到了很好的确定,在快速进展的情况下,精确度有所提高。就药物效应而言,两种方法对缓慢进展率的估计偏差都很大;不过,相对于总体进展率而言,这种偏差可以说是很小的。两种方法都能控制 1 类误差,对有药物效应和无药物效应模型的区分度相似。同时法比顺序法略微精确一些,而顺序法对纵向模型的误设更为稳健,在建立模型方面具有实际优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of Two Methods for Determining Item Characteristic Functions and Latent Variable Time-Course for Pharmacometric Item Response Models

Comparison of Two Methods for Determining Item Characteristic Functions and Latent Variable Time-Course for Pharmacometric Item Response Models

There are examples in the literature demonstrating different approaches to defining the item characteristic functions (ICF) and characterizing the latent variable time-course within a pharmacometrics item response theory (IRT) framework. One such method estimates both the ICF and latent variable time-course simultaneously, and another method establishes the ICF first then models the latent variable directly. To date, a direct comparison of the “simultaneous” and “sequential” methodologies described in this work has not yet been systematically investigated. Item parameters from a graded response IRT model developed from Parkinson’s Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI) study data were used as simulation parameters. Each method was evaluated under the following conditions: (i) with and without drug effect and (ii) slow progression rate with smaller sample size and rapid progression rate with larger sample size. Overall, the methods performed similarly, with low bias and good precision for key parameters and hypothesis testing for drug effect. The ICF parameters were well determined when the model was correctly specified, with an increase in precision in the scenario with rapid progression. In terms of drug effect, both methods had large estimation bias for the slow progression rate; however, this bias can be considered small relative to overall progression rate. Both methods demonstrated type 1 error control and similar discrimination between model with and without drug effect. The simultaneous method was slightly more precise than the sequential method while the sequential method was more robust towards longitudinal model misspecification and offers practical advantages in model building.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信