Pain and physical activity for one individual
A comparison of models
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2022.1.43237Keywords:
autoregressive correlation models, dynamic regression modeling, multilevel modeling, observational research, single case dataAbstract
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.
Downloads
References
McDonald S, Vieira R, Johnston DW. Analysing N-of-1 observational data in health psychology and behavioural medicine: a 10-step SPSS tutorial for beginners. Health Psych Behav Med. 2020;8(1):32-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2019.1711096 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2019.1711096
Van de Schoot R, Miocevic M. Small sample size solutions: a guide for applied researchers and practitioners. New York: Routledge; 2020. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/22385 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429273872
Leppink J. Bridging research and practice in health professions education: single case designs. As Pac Sch. 2022;7(1):109-11. https://doi.org/10.29060/TAPS.2022-7-1/PV2558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29060/TAPS.2022-7-1/PV2558
Samsung. Enhance your life with Samsung Health. [Internet]. [place unknown]: Samsung; [cited 2022 May 10]. Available from: https://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/apps/samsung-health
Vieira R, McDonald S, Araujo-Soares V, Sniehotta FF, Henderson R. Dynamic modelling of n-of-1 data: powerful and flexible data analytics applied to individualised studies. Health Psych Rev. 2017;11(3):222-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2017.1343680 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2017.1343680
Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, Team RC. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models, R Project: 2021 (version 3.1-157) [Internet]. [place unknown]; [cited 2022 May 10]. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nlme/nlme.pdf
Leppink J. Small numbers are an opportunity, not a problem. Sci Med. 2021;31(1): e40128. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2021.1.40128 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2021.1.40128
The jamovi project. jamovi (version 2.3) [Computer Software] [Internet]. [place unknown]; [cited 2022 May 10]. Available from: https://doi.org/jamovi.org
R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing (version 4.1) [Computer Software] [Internet]. [place unknown]; [ cited 2022 May 10]. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org
Gallucci M. GAMLj: general analyses for linear models (version 2.6.4) [Internet]. [place unknown]; [ cited 2022 May 10]. Available from:
Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Csaki F, editors. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Theory; Budapest: Academiai Kiado; 1973. p. 267-81.
Schwarz G. Estimating the dimensions of a model. Ann Stat. 1978;6:461-4. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2958889 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136
Leppink J. Statistical methods for experimental research in education and psychology. Cham: Springer; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21241-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21241-4
Leppink J. The art of modelling the learning process: uniting educational research and practice. Cham: Springer; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43082-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43082-5
Durbin J, Watson GS. Testing for serial correlation in least squares regression. Biomet. 1950;37(3-4):409-28. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/37.3-4.409 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/37.3-4.409
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Scientia Medica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.