Dataset Information

Two Methods for Calculating Symptom Cluster Scores.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Symptom clusters are conventionally distilled into a single score using composite scoring, which is based on the mathematical assumption that all symptoms are equivalently related to outcomes of interest; this may lead to a loss of important variation in the data. OBJECTIVES:This article compares two ways of calculating a single score for a symptom cluster: a conventional, hypothesis-driven composite score versus a data-driven, reduced rank regression score that weights the symptoms based on their individual relationships with key outcomes. METHODS:We conducted a secondary analysis of psychoneurological symptoms from a sample of 356 low-income mothers. Four of the psychoneurological symptoms (fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, sleep disturbance, and depressed mood) were measured with the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale; the fifth (pain) was measured using an item from the Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). Mothers' function was measured using the 12-item Short Form Health Survey. The composite score was calculated by summing standardized scores for each individual psychoneurological symptom. In contrast, reduced rank regression weighted the individual symptoms using their respective associations with mothers' function; the weighted individual symptom scores were summed into the reduced rank regression symptom score. RESULTS:The composite score and reduced rank regression score were highly correlated at .93. The cluster of psychoneurological symptoms accounted for 53.7% of the variation in the mothers' function. Depressed mood and pain accounted for almost all the explained variation in mothers' function at 37.2% and 15.0%, respectively. DISCUSSION:The composite score approach was simpler to calculate, and the high correlation with the reduced rank regression score indicates that the composite score reflected most of the variation explained by the reduced rank regression approach in this data set. However, the reduced rank regression analysis provided additional information by identifying pain and depressed mood as having the strongest association with a mother's function, which has implications for understanding which symptoms to target in future interventions. Future studies should also explore composite versus reduced rank regression approaches given that reduced rank regression may yield different insights in other data sets.

SUBMITTER: Salomon RE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7050366 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar/Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Two Methods for Calculating Symptom Cluster Scores.

Salomon Rebecca E RE Crandell Jamie J Muscatell Keely A KA Santos Hudson P HP Anderson Ruth A RA Beeber Linda S LS

Nursing research 20200301 2

<h4>Background</h4>Symptom clusters are conventionally distilled into a single score using composite scoring, which is based on the mathematical assumption that all symptoms are equivalently related to outcomes of interest; this may lead to a loss of important variation in the data.<h4>Objectives</h4>This article compares two ways of calculating a single score for a symptom cluster: a conventional, hypothesis-driven composite score versus a data-driven, reduced rank regression score that weights ...[more]

PMID: 31804434

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA key requirement for a useful power calculation is that the calculation mimic the data analysis that will be performed on the actual data, once that data is observed. Close approximations may be difficult to achieve using analytic solutions, however, and thus Monte Carlo approaches, including both simulation and bootstrap resampling, are often attractive. One setting in which this is particularly true is cluster-randomized trial designs. However, Monte Carlo approaches are useful in many additional settings as well. Calculating power for cluster-randomized trials using analytic or simulation-based methods is frequently unsatisfactory due to the complexity of the data analysis methods to be employed and to the sparseness of data to inform the choice of important parameters in these methods.MethodsWe propose that among Monte Carlo methods, bootstrap approaches are most likely to generate data similar to the observed data. In bootstrap approaches, real data are resampled to build complete data sets based on real data that resemble the data for the intended analyses. In contrast, simulation methods would use the real data to estimate parameters for the data, and would then simulate data using these parameters. We describe means of implementing bootstrap power calculation.ResultsWe demonstrate bootstrap power calculation for a cluster-randomized trial with a censored survival outcome and a baseline observation period.ConclusionsBootstrap power calculation is a natural application of resampling methods. It provides a relatively simple solution to power calculation that is likely to be more accurate than analytic solutions or simulation-based calculations, in the sense that the bootstrap approach does not rely on the assumptions inherent in analytic calculations. This method of calculation has several important strengths. Notably, it is simple to achieve great fidelity to the proposed data analysis method and there is no requirement for parameter estimates, or estimates of their variability, from outside settings. So, for example, for cluster-randomized trials, power calculations need not depend on intracluster correlation coefficient estimates from outside studies. In contrast, bootstrap power calculation requires initial data that resemble data that are to be used in the planned study. We are not aware of bootstrap power calculation being previously proposed or explored for cluster-randomized trials, but it can also be applied for other study designs. We show with a simulation study that bootstrap power calculation can replicate analytic power in cases where analytic power can be accurately calculated. We also demonstrate power calculations for correlated censored survival outcomes in a cluster-randomized trial setting, for which we are unaware of an analytic alternative. The method can easily be used when preliminary data are available, as is likely to be the case when research is performed in health delivery systems or other settings where electronic medical records can be obtained.

Dataset Information

Two Methods for Calculating Symptom Cluster Scores.

Publications

Two Methods for Calculating Symptom Cluster Scores.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets