Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1738-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Previous studies using the WHOQOL measures have demonstrated that the relationship between individual items and the underlying quality of life (QoL) construct may differ between cultures. If unaccounted for, these differing relationships can lead to measurement bias which, in turn, can undermine the reliability of results.
We used item response theory (IRT) to assess differential item functioning (DIF) in WHOQOL data from diverse language versions collected in UK, Zimbabwe, Russia, and India (total N = 1332). Data were fitted to the partial credit ‘Rasch’ model. We used four item banks previously derived from the WHOQOL-100 measure, which provided excellent measurement for physical, psychological, social, and environmental quality of life domains (40 items overall). Cross-cultural differential item functioning was assessed using analysis of variance for item residuals and post hoc Tukey tests. Simulated computer-adaptive tests (CATs) were conducted to assess the efficiency and precision of the four items banks.
Splitting item parameters by DIF results in four linked item banks without DIF or other breaches of IRT model assumptions. Simulated CATs were more precise and efficient than longer paper-based alternatives.
Assessing differential item functioning using item response theory can identify measurement invariance between cultures which, if uncontrolled, may undermine accurate comparisons in computer-adaptive testing assessments of QoL. We demonstrate how compensating for DIF using item anchoring allowed data from all four countries to be compared on a common metric, thus facilitating assessments which were both sensitive to cultural nuance and comparable between countries.
Skevington, S. (2002). Advancing cross-cultural research on quality of life: Observations drawn from the WHOQOL development. Quality of Life Research, 11, 135–144.
Bowden, A., & Fox-Rushby, J. ( 2003). A systematic and critical review of the process of translation and adaptation of generic health-related quality of life measures in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe. Social Science and Medicine, 57, 1289–1306. CrossRef
Leplege, A., & Ecosse, E. (1999). Methodological issues in using the Rasch model to select cross culturally equivalent items in order to develop a quality of life index: The analysis of four WHOQOL-100 data sets (Argentina, France, Hong Kong, United Kingdom). Journal of Applied Measurement, 1, 372–392.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
Holland, P., & Wainer, H. (2012). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Tennant, A., Penta, M., Tesio, L., Grimby, G., Thonnard, J.-L., & Slade, A., et al. (2004). Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: The PRO-ESOR project. Medical Care, 42, I37–I48. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000103529.63132.77. CrossRefPubMed
Gibbons, C. J., Mills, R. J., Thornton, E. W., Ealing, J., Mitchell, J. D., & Shaw, P. J., et al. (2011). Development of a patient reported outcome measure for fatigue in motor neurone disease: The Neurological Fatigue Index (NFI-MND). Health Qual Life Outcomes, 9, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-9-101. CrossRef
Teresi, J. A., Ramirez, M., Lai, J.-S., & Silver, S. (2008). Occurrences and sources of differential item functioning (DIF) in patient-reported outcome measures: Description of DIF methods, and review of measures of depression, quality of life and general health. Psychology Science Quartely, 50, 538.
Wahl, I., Löwe, B., Bjorner, J. B., Fischer, F., Langs, G., Voderholzer, U., et al. (2014). Standardization of depression measurement: A common metric was developed for 11 self-report depression measures. Journal of Clin Epidemiology, 67, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.04.019. CrossRef
Gibbons, R. D., Weiss, D. J., Frank, E., & Kupfer, D. (2016). Computerized adaptive diagnosis and testing of mental health disorders. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093634. CrossRefPubMed
Hobart, J. (2003). Rating scales for neurologists. Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 74, 22iv–26. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.74.suppl_4.iv22. CrossRef
Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45, S22–S31. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04. CrossRefPubMed
World Health Organization. (1996). WHOQOL-BREF: Introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment: Field trial version, December 1996. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Skevington, S., Lotfy, M., & O’Connell, K. (2004). The world health organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: Psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL Group. Quality Life Research, 13, 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:QURE.0000018486.91360.00. CrossRef
Tennant, A., & Pallant, J. (2006). Unidimensionality matters!(A tale of two Smiths?) Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20, 1048–1051.
Teresi, J. (2006). Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications: Advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics. Medical Care, 44, S152–S170.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., & Groenvold, M., et al. (2009). The practical impact of differential item functioning analyses in a health-related quality of life instrument. Quality of Life Research. Springer Netherlands, 18, 1125–1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9521-z. CrossRef
Bee, P., Gibbons, C., Callaghan, P., Fraser, C., & Lovell, K. (2016). Evaluating and quantifying user and carer involvement in mental health care planning (EQUIP): Co-development of a new patient-reported outcome measure. PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science, 11, e0149973. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149973. CrossRef
Yen, W. (1993).Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 187–213. CrossRef
Christiansen, K., Maransky, G., & Horton, M. (2017). Critical values for Yen’s Q3: Identification of local dependence in the Rasch model using residual correlations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 41, 179–194.
Smith, E. V. (2002). Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, 205–231. PubMed
Choi, S. (2009). Firestar: Computerized adaptive testing simulation program for polytomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 644–645
Camilli, G. (1994). Origin of the scaling constant d = 1.7 in item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 19, 293–295. CrossRef
WHOQOL Group. (1998). The world health organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Social Science Medicine, 46, 1569–1585. CrossRef
Andrich, D., Sheridan, B., & Luo, G. (2010). Rasch models for measurement: RUMM2030. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Pty Ltd.
RDC Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria.
Benítez-Borrego, S., & Mancho-Fora, N. (2016). Differential item functioning of WHOQOL-BREF in nine Iberoamerican countries. Psicologia y Salud, 7, 51–59.
Samejima, F. (1997). Graded response model. In W.J. van der Linden, R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory. New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-2691-6.
- Adjusting for cross-cultural differences in computer-adaptive tests of quality of life
C. J. Gibbons
S. M. Skevington
- Springer International Publishing