On the reproducibility of extrusion-based bioprinting: round robin study on standardization in the field.

The outcome of three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting heavily depends, amongst others, on the interaction between the developed bioink, the printing process, and the printing equipment. However, if this interplay is ensured, bioprinting promises unmatched possibilities in the health care area. To pave the way for comparing newly developed biomaterials, clinical studies, and medical applications (i.e. printed organs, patient-specific tissues), there is a great need for standardization of manufacturing methods in order to enable technology transfers. Despite the importance of such standardization, there is currently a tremendous lack of empirical data that examines the reproducibility and robustness of production in more than one location at a time. In this work, we present data derived from a round robin test for extrusion-based 3D printing performance comprising 12 different academic laboratories throughout Germany and analyze the respective prints using automated image analysis (IA) in three independent academic groups. The fabrication of objects from polymer solutions was standardized as much as currently possible to allow studying the comparability of results from different laboratories. This study has led to the conclusion that current standardization conditions still leave room for the intervention of operators due to missing automation of the equipment. This affects significantly the reproducibility and comparability of bioprinting experiments in multiple laboratories. Nevertheless, automated IA proved to be a suitable methodology for quality assurance as three independently developed workflows achieved similar results. Moreover, the extracted data describing geometric features showed how the function of printers affects the quality of the printed object. A significant step toward standardization of the process was made as an infrastructure for distribution of material and methods, as well as for data transfer and storage was successfully established.

Comparing Attitudes Across Groups: An IRT-Based Item-Fit Statistic for the Analysis of Measurement Invariance.

Questionnaires for the assessment of attitudes and other psychological traits are crucial in educational and psychological research, and item response theory (IRT) has become a viable tool for scaling such data. Many international large-scale assessments aim at comparing these constructs across countries, and the invariance of measures across countries is thus required. In its most recent cycle, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA 2015) implemented an innovative approach for testing the invariance of IRT-scaled constructs in the context questionnaires administered to students, parents, school principals, and teachers. On the basis of a concurrent calibration with equal item parameters across all groups (i.e., languages within countries), a group-specific item-fit statistic (root mean square deviance [RMSD]) was used as a measure for the invariance of item parameters for individual groups. The present simulation study examines the statistic's distribution under different types and extents of (non)invariance in polytomous items. Responses to five 4-point Likert-type items were generated under the generalized partial credit model (GPCM) for 1,000 simulees in 50 groups each. For one of the five items, either location or discrimination parameters were drawn from a normal distribution. In addition to the type of noninvariance, the extent of noninvariance was varied by manipulating the variation of these distributions. The results indicate that the RMSD statistic is better at detecting noninvariance related to between-group differences in item location than in item discrimination. The study's findings may be used as a starting point to sensitivity analysis aiming to define cutoff values for determining (non)invariance.