TY - JOUR
T1 - Approaches for creating comparable measures of alcohol use symptoms
T2 - Harmonization with eight studies of criminal justice populations
AU - Hussong, Andrea M.
AU - Gottfredson, Nisha C.
AU - Bauer, Dan J.
AU - Curran, Patrick J.
AU - Haroon, Maleeha
AU - Chandler, Redonna
AU - Kahana, Shoshana Y.
AU - Delaney, Joseph A.C.
AU - Altice, Frederick L.
AU - Beckwith, Curt G.
AU - Feaster, Daniel J.
AU - Flynn, Patrick M.
AU - Gordon, Michael S.
AU - Knight, Kevin
AU - Kuo, Irene
AU - Ouellet, Lawrence J.
AU - Quan, Vu M.
AU - Seal, David W.
AU - Springer, Sandra A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - Background: With increasing data archives comprised of studies with similar measurement, optimal methods for data harmonization and measurement scoring are a pressing need. We compare three methods for harmonizing and scoring the AUDIT as administered with minimal variation across 11 samples from eight study sites within the STTR (Seek-Test-Treat-Retain) Research Harmonization Initiative. Descriptive statistics and predictive validity results for cut-scores, sum scores, and Moderated Nonlinear Factor Analysis scores (MNLFA; a psychometric harmonization method) are presented. Methods: Across the eight study sites, sample sizes ranged from 50 to 2405 and target populations varied based on sampling frame, location, and inclusion/exclusion criteria. The pooled sample included 4667 participants (82% male, 52% Black, 24% White, 13% Hispanic, and 8% Asian/ Pacific Islander; mean age of 38.9 years). Participants completed the AUDIT at baseline in all studies. Results: After logical harmonization of items, we scored the AUDIT using three methods: published cut-scores, sum scores, and MNLFA. We found greater variation, fewer floor effects, and the ability to directly address missing data in MNLFA scores as compared to cut-scores and sum scores. MNLFA scores showed stronger associations with binge drinking and clearer study differences than did other scores. Conclusions: MNLFA scores are a promising tool for data harmonization and scoring in pooled data analysis. Model complexity with large multi-study applications, however, may require new statistical advances to fully realize the benefits of this approach.
AB - Background: With increasing data archives comprised of studies with similar measurement, optimal methods for data harmonization and measurement scoring are a pressing need. We compare three methods for harmonizing and scoring the AUDIT as administered with minimal variation across 11 samples from eight study sites within the STTR (Seek-Test-Treat-Retain) Research Harmonization Initiative. Descriptive statistics and predictive validity results for cut-scores, sum scores, and Moderated Nonlinear Factor Analysis scores (MNLFA; a psychometric harmonization method) are presented. Methods: Across the eight study sites, sample sizes ranged from 50 to 2405 and target populations varied based on sampling frame, location, and inclusion/exclusion criteria. The pooled sample included 4667 participants (82% male, 52% Black, 24% White, 13% Hispanic, and 8% Asian/ Pacific Islander; mean age of 38.9 years). Participants completed the AUDIT at baseline in all studies. Results: After logical harmonization of items, we scored the AUDIT using three methods: published cut-scores, sum scores, and MNLFA. We found greater variation, fewer floor effects, and the ability to directly address missing data in MNLFA scores as compared to cut-scores and sum scores. MNLFA scores showed stronger associations with binge drinking and clearer study differences than did other scores. Conclusions: MNLFA scores are a promising tool for data harmonization and scoring in pooled data analysis. Model complexity with large multi-study applications, however, may require new statistical advances to fully realize the benefits of this approach.
KW - Data harmonization
KW - Data pooling
KW - Drinking severity
KW - Integrative data analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056179571&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056179571&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.10.003
DO - 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.10.003
M3 - Article
C2 - 30412898
AN - SCOPUS:85056179571
SN - 0376-8716
VL - 194
SP - 59
EP - 68
JO - Drug and alcohol dependence
JF - Drug and alcohol dependence
ER -