Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2022 Jun 7;12(6):e061469.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061469.

Pairing regression and configurational analysis in health services research: modelling outcomes in an observational cohort using a split-sample design

Edward J Miech  1   2 , Anthony J Perkins  3 , Ying Zhang  4 , Laura J Myers  5   2 , Jason J Sico  6   7 , Joanne Daggy  3 , Dawn M Bravata  5   2
Affiliations
Observational Study

Pairing regression and configurational analysis in health services research: modelling outcomes in an observational cohort using a split-sample design

Edward J Miech et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Background: Configurational methods are increasingly being used in health services research.

Objectives: To use configurational analysis and logistic regression within a single data set to compare results from the two methods.

Design: Secondary analysis of an observational cohort; a split-sample design involved randomly dividing patients into training and validation samples.

Participants and setting: Patients who had a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) in US Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals.

Measures: The patient outcome was the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality or recurrent ischaemic stroke within 1 year post-TIA. The quality-of-care outcome was the without-fail rate (proportion of patients who received all processes for which they were eligible, among seven processes).

Results: For the recurrent stroke or death outcome, configurational analysis yielded a three-pathway model identifying a set of (validation sample) patients where the prevalence was 15.0% (83/552), substantially higher than the overall sample prevalence of 11.0% (relative difference, 36%). The configurational model had a sensitivity (coverage) of 84.7% and specificity of 40.6%. The logistic regression model identified six factors associated with the combined endpoint (c-statistic, 0.632; sensitivity, 63.3%; specificity, 63.1%). None of these factors were elements of the configurational model. For the quality outcome, configurational analysis yielded a single-pathway model identifying a set of (validation sample) patients where the without-fail rate was 64.3% (231/359), nearly twice the overall sample prevalence (33.7%). The configurational model had a sensitivity (coverage) of 77.3% and specificity of 78.2%. The logistic regression model identified seven factors associated with the without-fail rate (c-statistic, 0.822; sensitivity, 80.3%; specificity, 84.2%). Two of these factors were also identified in the configurational analysis.

Conclusions: Configurational analysis and logistic regression represent different methods that can enhance our understanding of a data set when paired together. Configurational models optimise sensitivity with relatively few conditions. Logistic regression models discriminate cases from controls and provided inferential relationships between outcomes and independent variables.

Keywords: neurology; statistics & research methods; stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

    1. Yakovchenko V, Miech EJ, Chinman MJ, et al. . Strategy configurations directly linked to higher hepatitis C virus treatment starts: an applied use of configurational comparative methods. Med Care 2020;58:e31–8. 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001319 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hickman SE, Miech EJ, Stump TE, et al. . Identifying the implementation conditions associated with positive outcomes in a successful nursing facility demonstration project. Gerontologist 2020;60:1566–74. 10.1093/geront/gnaa041 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Palinkas LA, Mendon SJ, Hamilton AB. Innovations in mixed methods evaluations. Annu Rev Public Health 2019;40:423–42. 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044215 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Harris K, Kneale D, Lasserson TJ, et al. . School-based self-management interventions for asthma in children and adolescents: a mixed methods systematic review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;1:Cd011651. 10.1002/14651858.CD011651.pub2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cragun D. Configurational comparative methods. In: The handbook on implementation science. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020.

Publication types