Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients-Reported Outcomes (PRO) are increasingly used in clinical and epidemiological research. Two main types of analytical strategies can be found for these data: classical test theory (CTT) based on the observed scores and models...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Boyer François, Kubis Gildas, Le Néel Tanguy, Hardouin Jean-Benoit, Sébille Véronique, Guillemin Francis, Falissard Bruno
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2010-03-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/10/24
id doaj-66b188f263c74c31a4dd2cf20b84b87e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-66b188f263c74c31a4dd2cf20b84b87e2020-11-24T23:53:12ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882010-03-011012410.1186/1471-2288-10-24Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation studyBoyer FrançoisKubis GildasLe Néel TanguyHardouin Jean-BenoitSébille VéroniqueGuillemin FrancisFalissard Bruno<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients-Reported Outcomes (PRO) are increasingly used in clinical and epidemiological research. Two main types of analytical strategies can be found for these data: classical test theory (CTT) based on the observed scores and models coming from Item Response Theory (IRT). However, whether IRT or CTT would be the most appropriate method to analyse PRO data remains unknown. The statistical properties of CTT and IRT, regarding power and corresponding effect sizes, were compared.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two-group cross-sectional studies were simulated for the comparison of PRO data using IRT or CTT-based analysis. For IRT, different scenarios were investigated according to whether items or person parameters were assumed to be known, to a certain extent for item parameters, from good to poor precision, or unknown and therefore had to be estimated. The powers obtained with IRT or CTT were compared and parameters having the strongest impact on them were identified.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>When person parameters were assumed to be unknown and items parameters to be either known or not, the power achieved using IRT or CTT were similar and always lower than the expected power using the well-known sample size formula for normally distributed endpoints. The number of items had a substantial impact on power for both methods.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Without any missing data, IRT and CTT seem to provide comparable power. The classical sample size formula for CTT seems to be adequate under some conditions but is not appropriate for IRT. In IRT, it seems important to take account of the number of items to obtain an accurate formula.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/10/24
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Boyer François
Kubis Gildas
Le Néel Tanguy
Hardouin Jean-Benoit
Sébille Véronique
Guillemin Francis
Falissard Bruno
spellingShingle Boyer François
Kubis Gildas
Le Néel Tanguy
Hardouin Jean-Benoit
Sébille Véronique
Guillemin Francis
Falissard Bruno
Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
BMC Medical Research Methodology
author_facet Boyer François
Kubis Gildas
Le Néel Tanguy
Hardouin Jean-Benoit
Sébille Véronique
Guillemin Francis
Falissard Bruno
author_sort Boyer François
title Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
title_short Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
title_full Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
title_fullStr Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
title_full_unstemmed Methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
title_sort methodological issues regarding power of classical test theory (ctt) and item response theory (irt)-based approaches for the comparison of patient-reported outcomes in two groups of patients - a simulation study
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2010-03-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients-Reported Outcomes (PRO) are increasingly used in clinical and epidemiological research. Two main types of analytical strategies can be found for these data: classical test theory (CTT) based on the observed scores and models coming from Item Response Theory (IRT). However, whether IRT or CTT would be the most appropriate method to analyse PRO data remains unknown. The statistical properties of CTT and IRT, regarding power and corresponding effect sizes, were compared.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two-group cross-sectional studies were simulated for the comparison of PRO data using IRT or CTT-based analysis. For IRT, different scenarios were investigated according to whether items or person parameters were assumed to be known, to a certain extent for item parameters, from good to poor precision, or unknown and therefore had to be estimated. The powers obtained with IRT or CTT were compared and parameters having the strongest impact on them were identified.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>When person parameters were assumed to be unknown and items parameters to be either known or not, the power achieved using IRT or CTT were similar and always lower than the expected power using the well-known sample size formula for normally distributed endpoints. The number of items had a substantial impact on power for both methods.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Without any missing data, IRT and CTT seem to provide comparable power. The classical sample size formula for CTT seems to be adequate under some conditions but is not appropriate for IRT. In IRT, it seems important to take account of the number of items to obtain an accurate formula.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/10/24
work_keys_str_mv AT boyerfrancois methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
AT kubisgildas methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
AT leneeltanguy methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
AT hardouinjeanbenoit methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
AT sebilleveronique methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
AT guilleminfrancis methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
AT falissardbruno methodologicalissuesregardingpowerofclassicaltesttheorycttanditemresponsetheoryirtbasedapproachesforthecomparisonofpatientreportedoutcomesintwogroupsofpatientsasimulationstudy
_version_ 1725470676458930176