Back

A Beta-Binomial Model for Estimating Zero- or One-inflated Pain Trajectories

Liu, Y.; Harris, R. E.; Clauw, D.; Bayman, E.; Leroux, A.; Lindquist, M. A.

2026-05-11 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.05.07.721507 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Chronic pain is a widespread public health issue that imposes substantial health, emotional, and economic burdens on individuals and communities. Because pain is subjective and lacks objective biomarkers, it is typically measured using patient-reported scores, often on a numerical scale from zero to ten. Increasingly, pain studies use ecological momentary assessment, with multiple daily assessments over days and across study phases (e.g., a series of baseline and post-intervention assessments). These data frequently show many ratings at the extremes (i.e., at minimum or maximum pain scores), commonly referred to as zero- and one-inflation in the statistical literature, along with considerable within-person variability both within and across days. These phenomena present challenges for statistical analyses, as they violate assumptions of most commonly used statistical techniques (e.g., the normality assumption of linear mixed models). We propose a Bayesian beta-binomial mixed-effects model for modeling potential zero- or one-inflated pain scores while accounting for variability using random effects on the mean and variance parameters across subjects. A simulation study demonstrates that the method accurately estimates model parameters across realistic sample sizes, time points, and zero- and one-inflation levels. An application to data from two longitudinal pain studies demonstrates that the model fits the data better and, when correctly specified, yields accurate uncertainty intervals for longitudinal changes in pain compared to existing models, especially for zero- and one-inflated outcomes. Additionally, the model directly estimates the probability of clinically meaningful pain events. The proposed method provides a powerful statistical framework for studying the patient-reported pain trajectories.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 4%
24.0%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 4%
11.1%
3
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.7%
4
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 4%
7.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.1%
6
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.9%
7
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
8
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.6%
9
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
10
Biometrics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
11
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
12
BioData Mining
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
13
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 22%
1.3%
14
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
15
Journal of Neurotrauma
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.0%
17
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
19
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 61%
0.8%
22
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.8%
24
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.8%
25
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
26
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 43%
0.8%
27
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
28
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
29
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
30
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%