Home  About us  Contact
 

Subgroup Differences (subgroup + difference)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences50%

Selected Abstracts

Modeling the Practical Effects of Applicant Reactions: Subgroup Differences in Test-Taking Motivation, Test Performance, and Selection Rates

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 4 2002
Robert E. Ployhart
Research suggests that Black,White differences in test-taking motivation may be related to subgroup test score differences, but this research has not shown the extent to which minimizing subgroup motivation differences will reduce subgroup differences in selection rates and adverse impact. This Monte Carlo study examined how enhancing Blacks' test-taking motivation for cognitive ability tests might reduce adverse impact across a range of (a) subgroup test differences, (b) selection ratios, (c) subgroup differences in test-taking motivation, and (d) relationships between motivation and test scores. The results suggest that although enhancing test-taking motivation will consistently reduce subgroup differences in test performance and adverse impact, the effect is often small and will not eliminate adverse impact for any condition we examine. However, under some conditions the reduction may be important, and the discussion considers conditions where even these minimal reductions may be practically helpful. [source]

Methods for incorporating covariate adjustment, subgroup analysis and between-centre differences into cost-effectiveness evaluations

HEALTH ECONOMICS, Issue 12 2005
Richard M. Nixon
Abstract Background: Overall assessments of cost,effectiveness are now commonplace in informing medical policy decision making. It is often important, however, also to investigate how cost,effectiveness varies between patient subgroups. Yet such analyses are rarely undertaken, because appropriate methods have not been sufficiently developed. Methods: We propose a coherent set of Bayesian methods to extend cost,effectiveness analyses to adjust for baseline covariates, to investigate differences between subgroups, and to allow for differences between centres in a multicentre study using a hierarchical model. These methods consider costs and effects jointly, and allow for the typically skewed distribution of cost data. The results are presented as inferences on the cost,effectiveness plane, and as cost,effectiveness acceptability curves. Results: In applying these methods to a randomised trial of case management of psychotic patients, we show that overall cost,effectiveness can be affected by ignoring the skewness of cost data, but that it may be difficult to gain substantial precision by adjusting for baseline covariates. While analyses of overall cost,effectiveness can mask important subgroup differences, crude differences between centres may provide an unrealistic indication of the true differences between them. Conclusions: The methods developed allow a flexible choice for the distributions used for cost data, and have a wide range of applicability , to both randomised trials and observational studies. Experience needs to be gained in applying these methods in practice, and using their results in decision making. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Incremental Validity of Situational Judgment Tests for Task and Contextual Job Performance

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 1 2007
Matthew S. O'Connell
This paper has three goals. First, it responds to calls for additional research on subgroup differences in situational judgment tests. Second, it expands the cumulative knowledge on the incremental validity of situational judgment tests beyond cognitive ability and personality. Third, it examines the validity and incremental validity of various predictors for both task and contextual performance. [source]

Modeling the Practical Effects of Applicant Reactions: Subgroup Differences in Test-Taking Motivation, Test Performance, and Selection Rates

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 4 2002
Robert E. Ployhart
Research suggests that Black,White differences in test-taking motivation may be related to subgroup test score differences, but this research has not shown the extent to which minimizing subgroup motivation differences will reduce subgroup differences in selection rates and adverse impact. This Monte Carlo study examined how enhancing Blacks' test-taking motivation for cognitive ability tests might reduce adverse impact across a range of (a) subgroup test differences, (b) selection ratios, (c) subgroup differences in test-taking motivation, and (d) relationships between motivation and test scores. The results suggest that although enhancing test-taking motivation will consistently reduce subgroup differences in test performance and adverse impact, the effect is often small and will not eliminate adverse impact for any condition we examine. However, under some conditions the reduction may be important, and the discussion considers conditions where even these minimal reductions may be practically helpful. [source]

The Asian birth outcome gap

PAEDIATRIC & PERINATAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, Issue 4 2006
Cheng Qin
Summary Asians are often considered a single group in epidemiological research. This study examines the extent of differences in maternal risks and birth outcomes for six Asian subgroups. Using linked birth/infant death certificate data from the State of California for the years 1992,97, we assessed maternal socio-economic risks and their effect on birthweight, preterm delivery (PTD), neonatal, post-neonatal and infant mortality for Filipino (87 120), Chinese (67 228), Vietnamese (45 237), Korean (23 431), Cambodian/Laotian (21 239) and Japanese (18 276) live singleton births. The analysis also included information about non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks in order to give a sense of the magnitude of risks among Asians. Logistic regression models explored the effect of maternal risk factors and PTD on Asian subgroup differences in neonatal and post-neonatal mortality, using Japanese as the reference group. Across Asian subgroups, the differences ranged from 2.5- to 135-fold for maternal risks, and 2.2-fold for infant mortality rate. PTD was an important contributor to neonatal mortality differences. Maternal risk factors contributed to the disparities in post-neonatal mortality. Significant differences in perinatal health across Asian subgroups deserve ethnicity-specific interventions addressing PTD, teen pregnancy, maternal education, parity and access to prenatal care. [source]

The Relationship between Eligibility Criteria for Participation in Alcohol Brief Intervention Trials and Other Alcohol and Health-Related Variables

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL ON ADDICTIONS, Issue 3 2001
Stephen A. Maisto Ph.D.
In clinical trials of brief interventions for alcohol use, individuals typically are defined as eligible for the research through meeting quantity- frequency (QF) of alcohol consumption criteria, alcohol-related problems criteria, or both. The purpose of this study was to evaluate preintervention and posttreatment differences among three groups of research participants eligible for participation in a brief intervention clinical trial by meeting the AUDIT total score criterion only, the QF criterion only, or both. The participants were 301 men and women 21 years of age or older who presented for medical treatment at one of twelve primary care clinics and were screened for participation in the clinical trial. Participants completed an assessment protocol at preintervention and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postintervention. The analyses showed statistical differences among the three subgroups on three outcome dimensions of alcohol consumption, related consequences and behaviors, and medical complications; for both consumption and complications, the AUDIT + QF participants showed greater severity than participants in either of the other two groups. For consequences, AU DIT + QF participants scored higher than the QF participants on one variable constituting this dimension. The overall subgroup differences were maintained at six months in the consumption and consequences data. The implications of these findings for sensitivity of brief intervention trial design, the discovery of patient moderators of intervention effectiveness, and clinical practice are discussed. [source]