Pairing regression and configurational analysis in health services research: modelling outcomes in an observational cohort using a split-sample design
dc.contributor.author | Miech, Edward J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Perkins, Anthony J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Zhang, Ying | |
dc.contributor.author | Myers, Laura J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Sico, Jason J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Daggy, Joanne | |
dc.contributor.author | Bravata, Dawn M. | |
dc.contributor.department | Biostatistics and Health Data Science, School of Medicine | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-07-13T17:51:59Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-07-13T17:51:59Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-06-07 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Configurational methods are increasingly being used in health services research. Objectives: To use configurational analysis and logistic regression within a single data set to compare results from the two methods. Design: Secondary analysis of an observational cohort; a split-sample design involved randomly dividing patients into training and validation samples. Participants and setting: Patients who had a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) in US Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals. Measures: The patient outcome was the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality or recurrent ischaemic stroke within 1 year post-TIA. The quality-of-care outcome was the without-fail rate (proportion of patients who received all processes for which they were eligible, among seven processes). Results: For the recurrent stroke or death outcome, configurational analysis yielded a three-pathway model identifying a set of (validation sample) patients where the prevalence was 15.0% (83/552), substantially higher than the overall sample prevalence of 11.0% (relative difference, 36%). The configurational model had a sensitivity (coverage) of 84.7% and specificity of 40.6%. The logistic regression model identified six factors associated with the combined endpoint (c-statistic, 0.632; sensitivity, 63.3%; specificity, 63.1%). None of these factors were elements of the configurational model. For the quality outcome, configurational analysis yielded a single-pathway model identifying a set of (validation sample) patients where the without-fail rate was 64.3% (231/359), nearly twice the overall sample prevalence (33.7%). The configurational model had a sensitivity (coverage) of 77.3% and specificity of 78.2%. The logistic regression model identified seven factors associated with the without-fail rate (c-statistic, 0.822; sensitivity, 80.3%; specificity, 84.2%). Two of these factors were also identified in the configurational analysis. Conclusions: Configurational analysis and logistic regression represent different methods that can enhance our understanding of a data set when paired together. Configurational models optimise sensitivity with relatively few conditions. Logistic regression models discriminate cases from controls and provided inferential relationships between outcomes and independent variables. | en_US |
dc.eprint.version | Final published version | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Miech EJ, Perkins AJ, Zhang Y, et al. Pairing regression and configurational analysis in health services research: modelling outcomes in an observational cohort using a split-sample design. BMJ Open. 2022;12(6):e061469. Published 2022 Jun 7. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061469 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1805/34357 | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | BMJ | en_US |
dc.relation.isversionof | 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061469 | en_US |
dc.relation.journal | BMJ Open | en_US |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International | * |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 | * |
dc.source | PMC | en_US |
dc.subject | Neurology | en_US |
dc.subject | Stroke | en_US |
dc.subject | Statistics & research methods | en_US |
dc.title | Pairing regression and configurational analysis in health services research: modelling outcomes in an observational cohort using a split-sample design | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |