A description of mixed group validation
- PMID: 23362309
- DOI: 10.1177/1073191112473176
A description of mixed group validation
Abstract
Mixed group validation (MGV) is a statistical model for estimating the diagnostic accuracy of tests. Unlike the more common approach to estimating criterion-related validity, known group validation (KGV), MGV does not require a perfect external validity criterion. The present article describes MGV by (a) specifying both the standard error associated with MGV validity estimates and the effect of assumption violation, (b) recommending required sample sizes under various study conditions, (c) evaluating whether assumption violation can be identified, and (d) providing a simulated example of an MGV with imperfect base rate estimates. It is concluded that MGV will always have a wider margin of error than KGV, MGV performs best when the research design approximates a KGV design, the effect of assumption violation depends on the severity of the assumption violation and also the value of the base rates, and that assumption violation may only be detected in severe cases.
Keywords: construct validity; criterion-related validity; mixed group validation; sensitivity; specificity.
© The Author(s) 2013.
Similar articles
-
Considerations underlying the use of mixed group validation.Psychol Assess. 2013 Mar;25(1):204-15. doi: 10.1037/a0030063. Epub 2012 Oct 1. Psychol Assess. 2013. PMID: 23025461
-
Mixed group validation: a method to address the limitations of criterion group validation in research on malingering detection.Behav Sci Law. 2000;18(6):693-718. doi: 10.1002/bsl.432. Behav Sci Law. 2000. PMID: 11180417
-
A Bayesian approach to mixed group validation of performance validity tests.Psychol Assess. 2015 Sep;27(3):763-76. doi: 10.1037/pas0000085. Epub 2015 Mar 30. Psychol Assess. 2015. PMID: 25822831
-
[What to do if statistical power is low? A practical strategy for pre-post-designs].Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2002 Sep-Oct;52(9-10):408-16. doi: 10.1055/s-2002-34288. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2002. PMID: 12355348 Review. German.
-
Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.Health Technol Assess. 2010 May;14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. doi: 10.3310/hta14250. Health Technol Assess. 2010. PMID: 20501062 Review.
Cited by
-
Invited Commentary: Bayesian Inference with Multiple Tests.Neuropsychol Rev. 2023 Sep;33(3):643-652. doi: 10.1007/s11065-023-09604-4. Epub 2023 Aug 18. Neuropsychol Rev. 2023. PMID: 37594692 Review.
-
Invited Commentary: Advancing but not yet Advanced: Assessment of Effort/Malingering in Forensic and Clinical Settings.Neuropsychol Rev. 2023 Sep;33(3):628-642. doi: 10.1007/s11065-023-09605-3. Epub 2023 Aug 18. Neuropsychol Rev. 2023. PMID: 37594693 Review.
-
Diagnostic Test Score Validation With a Fallible Criterion.Appl Psychol Meas. 2019 Nov;43(8):579-596. doi: 10.1177/0146621618817785. Epub 2018 Dec 13. Appl Psychol Meas. 2019. PMID: 31551637 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources