一个人的疼痛和体力活动

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Scientia Medica Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI:10.15448/1980-6108.2022.1.43237
J. Leppink
{"title":"一个人的疼痛和体力活动","authors":"J. Leppink","doi":"10.15448/1980-6108.2022.1.43237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aims: there is increasing awareness that for effective patient care we need more than only randomized controlled trials with groups of participants and that carefully collected single case (N = 1) data have several important advantages over traditional group-level studies. With the advance of technology, collecting relevant data from a single case is becoming easier by the day, and this offers tremendous opportunities for understanding how behaviors displayed by an individual can be influenced by one or several key variables. For example, how pain experienced influences the amount of time spent on physical exercise. Method: using publicly available observational single case data, five models are compared: a classical ordinary least squares (OLS) linear regression model; a dynamic regression model (DRM); a two-level random-intercepts model (2LRI); a continuous covariate first-order autoregressive correlation model (CAR1); and an ordinary least squares model with time trend (OLST). These models are compared in terms of overall model fit statistics, estimates of the relation between physical activity (response variable of interest) and pain (covariate of interest), and residual statistics. Results: 2LRI outperforms all other models on both overall model fit and residual statistics, and provides covariate estimates that are in between the relative extremes provided by other models. CAR1 and OLST demonstrate an almost identical performance and one that is substantially better than OLS – which performs worst – and DRM. Conclusion: for observational single case data, DRM, CAR1, OLST, and 2LRI account for the serial correlation that is typically present in single case data in somewhat different ways under somewhat different assumptions, and all perform better than OLS. Implications of these findings for observational, quasi-experimental, and experimental single case studies are discussed.","PeriodicalId":44024,"journal":{"name":"Scientia Medica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pain and physical activity for one individual\",\"authors\":\"J. Leppink\",\"doi\":\"10.15448/1980-6108.2022.1.43237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aims: there is increasing awareness that for effective patient care we need more than only randomized controlled trials with groups of participants and that carefully collected single case (N = 1) data have several important advantages over traditional group-level studies. With the advance of technology, collecting relevant data from a single case is becoming easier by the day, and this offers tremendous opportunities for understanding how behaviors displayed by an individual can be influenced by one or several key variables. For example, how pain experienced influences the amount of time spent on physical exercise. Method: using publicly available observational single case data, five models are compared: a classical ordinary least squares (OLS) linear regression model; a dynamic regression model (DRM); a two-level random-intercepts model (2LRI); a continuous covariate first-order autoregressive correlation model (CAR1); and an ordinary least squares model with time trend (OLST). These models are compared in terms of overall model fit statistics, estimates of the relation between physical activity (response variable of interest) and pain (covariate of interest), and residual statistics. Results: 2LRI outperforms all other models on both overall model fit and residual statistics, and provides covariate estimates that are in between the relative extremes provided by other models. CAR1 and OLST demonstrate an almost identical performance and one that is substantially better than OLS – which performs worst – and DRM. Conclusion: for observational single case data, DRM, CAR1, OLST, and 2LRI account for the serial correlation that is typically present in single case data in somewhat different ways under somewhat different assumptions, and all perform better than OLS. Implications of these findings for observational, quasi-experimental, and experimental single case studies are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scientia Medica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scientia Medica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2022.1.43237\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2022.1.43237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:人们越来越意识到,为了有效的患者护理,我们需要的不仅仅是有参与者分组的随机对照试验,而且仔细收集的单个病例(N=1)数据比传统的组水平研究具有几个重要优势。随着技术的进步,从单个病例中收集相关数据变得越来越容易,这为了解个人表现出的行为如何受到一个或多个关键变量的影响提供了巨大的机会。例如,疼痛的体验会影响花在体育锻炼上的时间。方法:利用公开的观测单例数据,比较五种模型:经典的普通最小二乘(OLS)线性回归模型;动态回归模型(DRM);两级随机拦截模型(2LRI);连续协变一阶自回归相关模型(CAR1);以及具有时间趋势的普通最小二乘模型(OLST)。这些模型在总体模型拟合统计、身体活动(感兴趣的反应变量)和疼痛(感兴趣协变量)之间关系的估计以及残差统计方面进行了比较。结果:2LRI在整体模型拟合和残差统计方面都优于所有其他模型,并提供了介于其他模型提供的相对极值之间的协变量估计。CAR1和OLST表现出几乎相同的性能,并且明显优于OLS(性能最差)和DRM。结论:对于观察性单例数据,DRM、CAR1、OLST和2LRI解释了在不同假设下以不同方式出现在单例数据中的序列相关性,并且都比OLS表现得更好。讨论了这些发现对观察性、准实验性和实验性个案研究的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Pain and physical activity for one individual
Aims: there is increasing awareness that for effective patient care we need more than only randomized controlled trials with groups of participants and that carefully collected single case (N = 1) data have several important advantages over traditional group-level studies. With the advance of technology, collecting relevant data from a single case is becoming easier by the day, and this offers tremendous opportunities for understanding how behaviors displayed by an individual can be influenced by one or several key variables. For example, how pain experienced influences the amount of time spent on physical exercise. Method: using publicly available observational single case data, five models are compared: a classical ordinary least squares (OLS) linear regression model; a dynamic regression model (DRM); a two-level random-intercepts model (2LRI); a continuous covariate first-order autoregressive correlation model (CAR1); and an ordinary least squares model with time trend (OLST). These models are compared in terms of overall model fit statistics, estimates of the relation between physical activity (response variable of interest) and pain (covariate of interest), and residual statistics. Results: 2LRI outperforms all other models on both overall model fit and residual statistics, and provides covariate estimates that are in between the relative extremes provided by other models. CAR1 and OLST demonstrate an almost identical performance and one that is substantially better than OLS – which performs worst – and DRM. Conclusion: for observational single case data, DRM, CAR1, OLST, and 2LRI account for the serial correlation that is typically present in single case data in somewhat different ways under somewhat different assumptions, and all perform better than OLS. Implications of these findings for observational, quasi-experimental, and experimental single case studies are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Scientia Medica
Scientia Medica MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Participação, recomendação, produção e socialização dos participantes de ligas acadêmicas na graduação em medicina Fatores associados à saúde mental de alunos do internato interprofissional de enfrentamento à COVID-19 Grandes deleções raras no CFTR O escorpionismo no Estado de Goiás (2003-2019) Determinantes sociais da qualidade de vida entre estudantes de graduação e sua associação com o risco de suicídio
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1