Use of Biostatistical Models to Manage Replicate Error in Concussion Biomarker Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Advancing research on fluid biomarkers associated with sport-related concussion (SRC) highlights the importance of detecting low concentrations using ultrasensitive platforms. However, common statistical practices may overlook replicate errors and specimen exclusion, emphasizing the need to explore robust modeling approaches that consider all available replicate data for comprehensive understanding of sample variation and statistical inferences. Objective: To evaluate the impact of replicate error and different biostatistical modeling approaches on SRC biomarker interpretation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study within the Surveillance in High Schools to Reduce the Risk of Concussions and Their Consequences study used data from healthy youth athletes (ages 11-18 years) collected from 3 sites across Canada between September 2019 and November 2021. Data were analyzed from November 2022 to February 2023. Exposures: Demographic variables included age, sex, and self-reported history of previous concussion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were preinjury plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 (UCH-L1), neurofilament-light (NFL), total tau (t-tau) and phosphorylated-tau-181 (p-tau-181) assayed in duplicate. Bland-Altman analysis determined the 95% limits of agreement (LOAs) for each biomarker. The impact of replicate error was explored using 3 biostatistical modeling approaches assessing the associations of age, sex, and previous concussion on biomarker concentrations: multilevel regression using all available replicate data, single-level regression using the means of replicate data, and single-level regression with replicate means, excluding specimens demonstrating more than 20% coefficient variation (CV). Results: The sample included 149 healthy youth athletes (78 [52%] male; mean [SD] age, 15.74 [1.41] years; 51 participants [34%] reporting ≥1 previous concussions). Wide 95% LOAs were observed for GFAP (-17.74 to 18.20 pg/mL), UCH-L1 (-13.80 to 14.77 pg/mL), and t-tau (65.27% to 150.03%). GFAP and UCH-L1 were significantly associated with sex in multilevel regression (GFAP: effect size, 15.65%; β = -0.17; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.04]; P = .02; UCH-L1: effect size, 17.24%; β = -0.19; 95% CI, -0.36 to -0.02]; P = .03) and single-level regression using the means of replicate data (GFAP: effect size, 15.56%; β = -0.17; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.03]; P = .02; UCH-L1: effect size, 18.02%; β = -0.20; 95% CI, -0.37 to -0.03]; P = .02); however, there was no association for UCH-L1 after excluding specimens demonstrating more than 20% CV. Excluding specimens demonstrating more than 20% CV resulted in decreased differences associated with sex in GFAP (effect size, 12.29%; β = -0.14; 95% CI, -0.273 to -0.004]; P = .04) and increased sex differences in UCH-L1 (effect size, 23.59%; β = -0.27; 95% CI, -0.55 to 0.01]; P = .06), with the widest 95% CIs (ie, least precision) found in UCH-L1. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of healthy youth athletes, varying levels of agreement between SRC biomarker technical replicates suggested that means of measurements may not optimize precision for population values. Multilevel regression modeling demonstrated how incorporating all available biomarker data could capture replicate variation, avoiding challenges associated with means and percentage of CV exclusion thresholds to produce more representative estimates of association.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".