Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
To develop a paper-and-pencil semi-adaptive test for 5 domains of health-related quality of life (PAT-5D-QOL) based on item response theory (IRT).
The questionnaire uses items from previously developed item banks for 5 domains: (1) walking, (2) handling objects, (3) daily activities, (4) pain or discomfort, and (5) feelings. For each domain, respondents are initially classified into 4 functional levels. Depending on the level, they are instructed to respond to a different set of 5 additional questions. IRT scores for each domain and overall health utility scores are obtained using a simple spreadsheet. The questions were selected using psychometric and conceptual criteria. The format of the questionnaire was developed through focus groups and cognitive interviews. Feasibility was tested in two population surveys. A simulation study was conducted to compare PAT-5D-QOL with a computerized adaptive test (CAT-5D-QOL) and a fixed questionnaire, developed from the same item banks, in terms of accuracy, bias, precision, and ceiling and floor effects.
Close to 90 % of the participants in feasibility studies followed the skip instructions properly. In a simulation study, scores on PAT-5D-QOL for all domains tended to be more accurate, more precise, less biased, and less affected by a ceiling effect than scores on a fixed IRT-based questionnaire of the same length. PAT-5D-QOL was slightly inferior to a fully adaptive instrument.
PAT-5D-QOL is a novel, semi-adaptive, IRT-based measure of health-related quality of life with a broad range of potential applications.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Hays, R. D., & Morales, L. S. (2000). Reise SP (2000) Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Medical Care, Suppl 9, II28–II42.
Wainer, H. (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Embretson, S., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., & Cella, D. (2005). The promise of PROMIS: Using item response theory to improve assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 23, S53–S57. PubMed
Bode, R. K., Lai, J. S., Dineen, K., Heinemann, A. W., Shevrin, D., Von Roenn, J., et al. (2006). Expansion of a physical function item bank and development of an abbreviated form for clinical research. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7, 1–15. PubMed
Lord, F. M. (1971). Tailored testing: An application of stochastic approximation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66, 336. CrossRef
Urry, V. W. (1977). Tailored testing: A successful application of latent trait theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 181–186. CrossRef
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Lord, F. M. (1971). The self-scoring flexilevel test. J Educational Measurment, 8(3), 147–151. CrossRef
Lord, F. M. (1971). A theoretical study of two-stage testing. Psychometrika, 36(3), 227–241. CrossRef
Kopec, J. A., Sayre, E. C., Davis, A. M., Badley, E. M., Abrahamowicz, M., Sherlock, L., et al. (2006). Assessment of health-related quality of life in arthritis: Conceptualization and development of five item banks using item response theory. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 33. PubMedCrossRef
Muraki, E. (1996). A generalized partial credit model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 153–164). New York: Springer.
Muraki, E., & Bock, R. D. (1993). Parscale: IRT based test scoring and item analysis for graded open-ended exercises and performance tasks. Chicago: Scientific Software Int.
Sayre, E. C., Kopec, J. A., Abrahamowicz, M., Anis, A. H., Badley, E. M., Davis, A. M., & Esdaile, J. M. (2007) Modeling multi-attribute health utility from five domain-specific IRT scores. Quality Life of Research (Suppl. A-49) (Abstract 1598). Presented at the 14th Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society for Quality of Life Research, Toronto, October 10–13, 2007.
Betz, N. E., & Weiss, D. J. (1975, July). Empirical and simulation studies of flexilevel ability testing. Research report 75-3, Psychometric Methods Program, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
De Ayala, R. J., Dodd, B. G., & Koch, W. R. (1990). A simulation and comparison of flexilevel and bayesian computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(3), 227–239. CrossRef
Lilley, M., & Pyper, A. (2009). The application of the flexilevel approach for the assessment of computer science undergraduates. In J. A. Jacko (Ed.), Human-computer interaction, part IV (pp. 140–148). Berlin: Springer.
Tulsky, D. S., Carlozzi, N. E., & Cella, D. (2011). Advances in outcomes measurement in rehabilitation medicine: current initiatives from the National Institutes of Health and the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(10 Suppl), S1–S6. PubMedCrossRef
- Development of a paper-and-pencil semi-adaptive questionnaire for 5 domains of health-related quality of life (PAT-5D-QOL)
Jacek A. Kopec
Eric C. Sayre
Aileen M. Davis
Elizabeth M. Badley
John M. Esdaile
- Springer Netherlands