Literature DB >> 33568948

A New Procedure to Assess When Estimates from the Cumulative Link Model Can Be Interpreted as Differences for Ordinal Scales in Quality of Life Studies.

Yilin Ning1,2, Peh Joo Ho3,4, Nathalie C Støer5,6, Ka Keat Lim7,8, Hwee-Lin Wee3,9, Mikael Hartman1,2,3,10, Marie Reilly11, Chuen Seng Tan3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Assessing the clinical importance of an exposure effect on a quality of life (QoL) score often requires quantifying the effect in terms of a difference in scores. Using the linear regression model (LRM) for this purpose assumes the ordinal score is a proxy for an underlying continuous variable, but the analysis offers no assessment for the validity of the assumption. We propose an approach that assesses the proxy assumption and estimates the exposure effect by using the cumulative link model (CLM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: CLM is a well-established regression model that assumes an ordinal score is an ordered category generated from applying thresholds to a latent continuous variable. Our approach assesses the proxy assumption by testing whether these thresholds are equidistant. We compared the performance of CLM and LRM using simulated ordinal data and illustrated their application to the effect of time since diagnosis on five subscales of fatigue among breast cancer survivors measured using the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory.
RESULTS: CLM had good performance in estimating the difference in means with simulated ordinal data satisfying the proxy assumption, even when the outcome had only a few categories. When the proxy assumption was inadequate, both the CLM and LRM had biased estimates with poor coverage. The proxy assumption was appropriate for four of the five subscales in our real data application to fatigue scores, which highlighted the importance of assessing the proxy assumption to avoid reporting invalid estimates in terms of the difference in scores.
CONCLUSION: The proxy assumption is critical to the interpretation of the exposure effect on the difference in mean QoL scores. CLM offers a valid test for the presence of an association, a method for assessing the proxy assumption, and when the assumption is adequate, an assessment for clinical significance using the difference in means.
© 2021 Ning et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cumulative link model; ordered probit model; ordinal outcome; ordinal regression; probit link; quality of life

Year:  2021        PMID: 33568948      PMCID: PMC7869833          DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S288801

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 1179-1349            Impact factor:   4.790


  16 in total

1.  Design and analysis of trials with quality of life as an outcome: a practical guide.

Authors:  S J Walters; M J Campbell; R Lall
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.051

2.  Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Ross D Crosby; Ronette L Kolotkin; G Rhys Williams
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  An introduction to item response theory for patient-reported outcome measurement.

Authors:  Tam H Nguyen; Hae-Ra Han; Miyong T Kim; Kitty S Chan
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Interpretation of patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Joseph C Cappelleri; Andrew G Bushmakin
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  Effect Size Estimates for the ESCAPE Trial: Proportional Odds Regression Versus Other Statistical Methods.

Authors:  Tolulope T Sajobi; Yukun Zhang; Bijoy K Menon; Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Joseph P Broderick; Michael D Hill
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  Promoting effective use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: themes from a "Methods Tool kit" paper series.

Authors:  Michael D Brundage; Albert W Wu; Yonaira M Rivera; Claire Snyder
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Quality of life in long-term breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Tina Hsu; Marguerite Ennis; Nicky Hood; Margaret Graham; Pamela J Goodwin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-08-26       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Residuals and Diagnostics for Ordinal Regression Models: A Surrogate Approach.

Authors:  Dungang Liu; Heping Zhang
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 5.033

9.  The use of bootstrap methods for analysing Health-Related Quality of Life outcomes (particularly the SF-36).

Authors:  Stephen J Walters; Michael J Campbell
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2004-12-09       Impact factor: 3.186

Review 10.  Minimal important differences for fatigue patient reported outcome measures-a systematic review.

Authors:  Åsa Nordin; Charles Taft; Åsa Lundgren-Nilsson; Anna Dencker
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.