• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

应用诊断分类模型的样本量要求。

Sample Size Requirements for Applying Diagnostic Classification Models.

作者信息

Sen Sedat, Cohen Allan S

机构信息

Educational Sciences Department, Faculty of Education, Harran University, Sanliurfa, Turkey.

Educational Psychology Department, College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2021 Jan 25;11:621251. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.621251. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.621251
PMID:33569029
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7868330/
Abstract

Results of a comprehensive simulation study are reported investigating the effects of sample size, test length, number of attributes and base rate of mastery on item parameter recovery and classification accuracy of four DCMs (i.e., C-RUM, DINA, DINO, and LCDMREDUCED). Effects were evaluated using bias and RMSE computed between true (i.e., generating) parameters and estimated parameters. Effects of simulated factors on attribute assignment were also evaluated using the percentage of classification accuracy. More precise estimates of item parameters were obtained with larger sample size and longer test length. Recovery of item parameters decreased as the number of attributes increased from three to five but base rate of mastery had a varying effect on the item recovery. Item parameter and classification accuracy were higher for DINA and DINO models.

摘要

报告了一项全面模拟研究的结果,该研究调查了样本量、测试长度、属性数量和掌握基础率对四种诊断分类模型(即C-RUM、DINA、DINO和LCDMREDUCED)的项目参数恢复和分类准确性的影响。使用真实(即生成)参数和估计参数之间计算的偏差和均方根误差来评估影响。还使用分类准确率百分比评估了模拟因素对属性分配的影响。样本量越大、测试长度越长,项目参数的估计就越精确。随着属性数量从三个增加到五个,项目参数的恢复率下降,但掌握基础率对项目恢复有不同的影响。DINA和DINO模型的项目参数和分类准确率更高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/3d60fe350eab/fpsyg-11-621251-g0006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/da9de2b57dea/fpsyg-11-621251-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/f491a16054b7/fpsyg-11-621251-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/167663941f2f/fpsyg-11-621251-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/1ac06b39364f/fpsyg-11-621251-g0004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/cb7f4ac79de9/fpsyg-11-621251-g0005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/3d60fe350eab/fpsyg-11-621251-g0006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/da9de2b57dea/fpsyg-11-621251-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/f491a16054b7/fpsyg-11-621251-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/167663941f2f/fpsyg-11-621251-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/1ac06b39364f/fpsyg-11-621251-g0004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/cb7f4ac79de9/fpsyg-11-621251-g0005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bfd/7868330/3d60fe350eab/fpsyg-11-621251-g0006.jpg

相似文献

1
Sample Size Requirements for Applying Diagnostic Classification Models.应用诊断分类模型的样本量要求。
Front Psychol. 2021 Jan 25;11:621251. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.621251. eCollection 2020.
2
The accuracy and consistency of mastery for each content domain using the Rasch and deterministic inputs, noisy “and” gate diagnostic classification models: a simulation study and a real-world analysis using data from the Korean Medical Licensing Examination.使用 Rasch 和确定性输入、嘈杂“与”门诊断分类模型对每个内容领域的掌握程度的准确性和一致性:一项基于韩国医师执照考试数据的模拟研究和真实世界分析。
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2021;18:15. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2021.18.15. Epub 2021 Jul 5.
3
The Impact of Sample Size and Various Other Factors on Estimation of Dichotomous Mixture IRT Models.样本量及其他各种因素对二分混合IRT模型估计的影响
Educ Psychol Meas. 2023 Jun;83(3):520-555. doi: 10.1177/00131644221094325. Epub 2022 May 19.
4
Estimation approaches in cognitive diagnosis modeling when attributes are hierarchically structured.认知诊断建模中属性呈层次结构时的估计方法。
Psicothema. 2020 Feb;32(1):122-129. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2019.182.
5
Examining Parameter Invariance in a General Diagnostic Classification Model.检验一般诊断分类模型中的参数不变性。
Front Psychol. 2020 Jan 13;10:2930. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02930. eCollection 2019.
6
Model Selection for Cogitative Diagnostic Analysis of the Reading Comprehension Test.阅读理解测试的认知诊断分析的模型选择
Front Psychol. 2021 Aug 13;12:644764. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.644764. eCollection 2021.
7
Identifiability of Diagnostic Classification Models.诊断分类模型的可识别性。
Psychometrika. 2016 Sep;81(3):625-49. doi: 10.1007/s11336-015-9471-z. Epub 2015 Jul 9.
8
Probabilistic-Input, Noisy Conjunctive Models for Cognitive Diagnosis.用于认知诊断的概率输入噪声合取模型
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 14;9:997. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00997. eCollection 2018.
9
Estimation of item parameters and examinees' mastery probability in each domain of the Korean medical licensing examination using deterministic inputs, noisy and gate(DINA) model.使用确定性输入、噪声与门(DINA)模型,对韩国医师执照考试各领域项目参数和考生掌握概率进行估计。
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2020;17:35. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2020.17.35. Epub 2020 Nov 17.
10
Growth Modeling in a Diagnostic Classification Model (DCM) Framework-A Multivariate Longitudinal Diagnostic Classification Model.诊断分类模型(DCM)框架下的增长建模——一种多变量纵向诊断分类模型
Front Psychol. 2020 Aug 7;11:1714. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01714. eCollection 2020.

引用本文的文献

1
Validating attribute hierarchies in cognitive diagnosis models.认知诊断模型中属性层次结构的验证
Front Psychol. 2025 Apr 28;16:1562807. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1562807. eCollection 2025.
2
Prediction of neonatal death in pregnant women in an intensive care unit: Application of machine learning models.重症监护病房中孕妇新生儿死亡的预测:机器学习模型的应用
Heliyon. 2023 Oct 5;9(10):e20693. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20693. eCollection 2023 Oct.
3
Nonparametric cognitive diagnosis of profiles of mathematical knowledge of teacher education candidates.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluating the Fit of Sequential G-DINA Model Using Limited-Information Measures.使用有限信息测度评估序列G-DINA模型的拟合度。
Appl Psychol Meas. 2020 May;44(3):167-181. doi: 10.1177/0146621619843829. Epub 2019 May 14.
2
Assessing Growth in a Diagnostic Classification Model Framework.评估诊断分类模型框架中的增长。
Psychometrika. 2018 Dec;83(4):963-990. doi: 10.1007/s11336-018-9638-5. Epub 2018 Sep 27.
3
: An Package for Facilitating Large-Scale Latent Variable Analyses in .用于在……中促进大规模潜在变量分析的一个软件包 。 你提供的原文似乎不完整,最后的“in.”后面缺少具体内容。
教师教育候选人数学知识概况的非参数认知诊断
Curr Psychol. 2023 Jan 17:1-14. doi: 10.1007/s12144-023-04256-2.
4
Improving reliability estimation in cognitive diagnosis modeling.提高认知诊断建模中的可靠性估计
Behav Res Methods. 2023 Oct;55(7):3446-3460. doi: 10.3758/s13428-022-01967-5. Epub 2022 Sep 20.
Struct Equ Modeling. 2018;25(4):621-638. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2017.1402334. Epub 2018 Jan 19.
4
Comparison of Relative Fit Indices for Diagnostic Model Selection.诊断模型选择的相对拟合指数比较。
Appl Psychol Meas. 2017 Sep;41(6):422-438. doi: 10.1177/0146621617695521. Epub 2017 Mar 8.
5
Performance of Fit Indices in Choosing Correct Cognitive Diagnostic Models and Q-Matrices.拟合指数在选择正确的认知诊断模型和Q矩阵中的表现。
Appl Psychol Meas. 2016 Sep;40(6):405-417. doi: 10.1177/0146621616647954. Epub 2016 Jul 28.
6
The Effects of Q-Matrix Design on Classification Accuracy in the Log-Linear Cognitive Diagnosis Model.Q矩阵设计对对数线性认知诊断模型中分类准确性的影响
Educ Psychol Meas. 2015 Jun;75(3):491-511. doi: 10.1177/0013164414539162. Epub 2014 Jun 22.
7
A General Method of Empirical Q-matrix Validation.一种经验性Q矩阵验证的通用方法。
Psychometrika. 2016 Jun;81(2):253-73. doi: 10.1007/s11336-015-9467-8. Epub 2015 May 6.
8
Hierarchical diagnostic classification models: a family of models for estimating and testing attribute hierarchies.分层诊断分类模型:用于估计和检验属性层次结构的一类模型。
Psychometrika. 2014 Apr;79(2):317-39. doi: 10.1007/s11336-013-9362-0. Epub 2014 Jan 30.
9
A general diagnostic model applied to language testing data.应用于语言测试数据的通用诊断模型。
Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2008 Nov;61(Pt 2):287-307. doi: 10.1348/000711007X193957. Epub 2007 Mar 22.
10
Measurement of psychological disorders using cognitive diagnosis models.使用认知诊断模型测量心理障碍。
Psychol Methods. 2006 Sep;11(3):287-305. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.11.3.287.