Trial reportCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2023
Item response theory in early phase clinical trials: Utilization of a reference model to analyze the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale.
Trial report in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Item response theory in early phase clinical trials: Utilization of a reference model to analyze the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Trial
- Task-aligned outcome learning in psychiatry: reducing endpoint dilution.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Sparse item testing of clinical scales in neurology trials to alleviate burden to patients.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In clinical trials, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) questionnaire data are added up to total scores before analysis, assuming equal contribution of each separate question. Item Response Theory (IRT)-based analysis avoids this by using individual question responses to determine the latent variable (ψ), which represents a measure of depression severity. However, utilization of IRT in early phase trials remains difficult, because large datasets are needed to develop IRT models. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the application and assumptions of a reference IRT model for analysis of an early phase trial. A cross-over, placebo-controlled study investigating the effect of intravenous racemic ketamine on MADRS scores in patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder was used as a case study. One hundred forty-seven MADRS responses were measured in 17 patients at five timepoints (predose to 2 weeks after dosing). Two reference IRT models based on different patient populations were selected from literature and used to determine ψ, while testing multiple approaches regarding assumed data distribution. Use of ψ versus total score to determine treatment effect was compared through linear mixed model analysis. Results showed that determined ψ values did not differ significantly between assumed distributions, but were significantly different when changing reference IRT model. Estimated treatment effect size was not significantly affected by chosen approach nor reference population. Finally, increased precision to determine treatment effect was achieved by using IRT versus total scores. This demonstrates the usefulness of reference IRT model application for analysis of questionnaire data in early phase clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.