A Primer on the Use of Equivalence Testing for Evaluating Measurement Agreement.
A Primer on the Use of Equivalence Testing for Evaluating Measurement Agreement.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1249/mss.0000000000001481
复制
发表时间：
2018-04
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Welk GJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dixon PM;Saint-Maurice PF;Kim Y;Hibbing P;Bai Y;Welk GJ
统计等价性检验比传统的差异检验更适合用来评估体力活动(PA)测量的有效性。本文介绍了等价性测试的基本原理，并给出了三个来自PA和适应度评估研究的例子。这三个例子说明了等价性检验的不同用法。示例1使用PA数据来评估活动监视器与已知标准的等价性。例2说明了在没有已知参考方法的情况下，两种基于现场的体能测量的等价性。示例3使用回归来评估一个活动监视器在23个活动套件中的等价性。这些例子说明了对等价性测试结果的适当报告和解释。在第一个例子中，平均标准测量显著地在平均PA监视器的+/−15%的范围内。平均差为0.18Met，[−0.15，0.52]的90%可信区间在[−0.65，0.65]的等价区内。在第二个例子中，我们选择将这两个度量的等价性定义为介于0.98和1.02之间的平均值的比率。平均VO2值的估计值之比为0.99，显著(p=0.007)在当量区域内。在第三个示例中，PA监视器并不等同于活动套件中的标准。估计的回归截距和斜率分别为−1.23和1.06。两个可信区间都不在建议的回归等效区内。当研究目标是显示方法之间的相似性时，等价性检验比传统的差异统计检验(例如，ANOVA和t-检验)更合适。
Statistical equivalence testing is more appropriate than conventional tests of difference to assess the validity of physical activity (PA) measures. This paper presents the underlying principles of equivalence testing and gives three examples from PA and fitness assessment research. The three examples illustrate different uses of equivalence tests. Example 1 uses PA data to evaluate an activity monitor’s equivalence to a known criterion. Example 2 illustrates the equivalence of two field-based measures of physical fitness with no known reference method. Example 3 uses regression to evaluate an activity monitor’s equivalence across a suite of 23 activities. The examples illustrate the appropriate reporting and interpretation of results from equivalence tests. In the first example, the mean criterion measure is significantly within +/−15% of the mean PA monitor. The mean difference is 0.18 METs and the 90% confidence interval of [−0.15, 0.52] is inside the equivalence region of [−0.65, 0.65]. In the second example, we chose to define equivalence for these two measures as a ratio of mean values between 0.98 and 1.02. The estimated ratio of mean VO2 values is 0.99, which is significantly (p=0.007) inside the equivalence region. In the third example, the PA monitor is not equivalent to the criterion across the suite of activities. The estimated regression intercept and slope are −1.23 and 1.06. Neither confidence interval is within the suggested regression equivalence regions. When the study goal is to show similarity between methods, equivalence testing is more appropriate than traditional statistical tests of differences (e.g., ANOVA and t-tests).