Applying advanced psychometric approaches yields differential randomised trial effect sizes: Secondary analysis of individual participant data from antidepressant studies using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
As multiple sophisticated techniques are used to evaluate psychometric scales, in theory reducing error and enhancing measurement of patient reported outcomes, we aimed to determine whether applying different psychometric analyses would demonstrate important differences in treatment effects.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We conducted secondary analysis of individual participant data from 20 antidepressant treatment trials obtained from Vivli.org (n=6,843). Pooled item-level data from the HRSD-17 were analysed using confirmatory factory analysis (CFA), item response theory (IRT) and network analysis (NA). Multilevel models were used to analyse differences in trial effects at approximately 8 weeks (range 4-12 weeks) post-treatment commencement, with standardised mean differences calculated as Cohen's d. Effect size outcomes for the original total depression scores were compared with psychometrically-informed outcomes based on abbreviated and weighted depression scores.
RESULTS
Several items performing poorly during psychometric analyses and were eliminated, resulting in different models being obtained for each approach. Treatment effects were modified as follows per psychometric approach: 10.4%-14.9% increase for CFA, 0%-2.9% increase for IRT, 14.9%-16.4% reduction for NA.
CONCLUSION
Psychometric analyses differentially moderate effect size outcomes depending on the method used. In a 20-trial sample, factor analytic approaches increased treatment effect sizes relative to…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 6,843 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Improving sleep quality leads to better mental health: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study
- A new aging measure captures morbidity and mortality risk across diverse subpopulations from NHANES IV: A cohort study
- Fruit, vegetable, and legume intake, and cardiovascular disease and deaths in 18 countries (PURE): a prospective cohort study
- Are noise and air pollution related to the incidence of dementia? A cohort study in London, England
- Long COVID symptoms and duration in SARS-CoV-2 positive children — a nationwide cohort study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.