Top

Quality of Life Research

Gepubliceerd in:

01-02-2014

Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative

Auteurs: Jakob B. Bjorner, Matthias Rose, Barbara Gandek, Arthur A. Stone, Doerte U. Junghaenel, John E. Ware Jr.

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 1/2014

Abstract

Purpose

To test the impact of method of administration (MOA) on the measurement characteristics of items developed in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).

Methods

Two non-overlapping parallel 8-item forms from each of three PROMIS domains (physical function, fatigue, and depression) were completed by 923 adults (age 18–89) with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, or rheumatoid arthritis. In a randomized cross-over design, subjects answered one form by interactive voice response (IVR) technology, paper questionnaire (PQ), personal digital assistant (PDA), or personal computer (PC) on the Internet, and a second form by PC, in the same administration. Structural invariance, equivalence of item responses, and measurement precision were evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory methods.

Results

Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis supported equivalence of factor structure across MOA. Analyses by item response theory found no differences in item location parameters and strongly supported the equivalence of scores across MOA.

Conclusions

We found no statistically or clinically significant differences in score levels in IVR, PQ, or PDA administration as compared to PC. Availability of large item response theory-calibrated PROMIS item banks allowed for innovations in study design and analysis.

vorige artikel Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox

volgende artikel Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Gwaltney, C. J., Shields, A. L., & Shiffman, S. (2008). Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: A meta-analytic review. Value Health, 11(2), 322–333.PubMedCrossRef

Raat, H., Mangunkusumo, R. T., Landgraf, J. M., et al. (2007). Feasibility, reliability, and validity of adolescent health status measurement by the Child Health Questionnaire Child Form (CHQ-CF): Internet administration compared with the standard paper version. Quality of Life Research, 16(4), 675–685.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Yu, S. C. (2007). Comparison of Internet-based and paper-based questionnaires in Taiwan using multisample invariance approach. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(4), 501–507.CrossRef

Duncan, P., Reker, D., Kwon, S., et al. (2005). Measuring stroke impact with the Stroke Impact Scale: Telephone versus mail administration in veterans with stroke. Medical Care, 43(5), 507–515.PubMedCrossRef

Hepner, K. A., Brown, J. A., & Hays, R. D. (2005). Comparison of mail and telephone in assessing patient experiences in receiving care from medical group practices. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 28(4), 377–389.PubMedCrossRef

de Vries, H., Elliott, M. N., Hepner, K. A., et al. (2005). Equivalence of mail and telephone responses to the CAHPS Hospital Survey. Health Services Research, 40(6 Pt 2), 2120–2139.PubMedCrossRef

Powers, J. R., Mishra, G., & Young, A. F. (2005). Differences in mail and telephone responses to self-rated health: Use of multiple imputation in correcting for response bias. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 29(2), 149–154.PubMedCrossRef

Beebe, T. J., McRae, J. A., Harrison, P. A., et al. (2005). Mail surveys resulted in more reports of substance use than telephone surveys. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(4), 421–424.PubMedCrossRef

Kraus, L., & Augustin, R. (2001). Measuring alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems: Comparison of responses from self-administered questionnaires and telephone interviews. Addiction, 96(3), 459–471.PubMedCrossRef

10.

McHorney, C. A., Kosinski, M., & Ware, J. E, Jr. (1994). Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: Results from a national survey. Medical Care, 32(6), 551–567.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Hanmer, J., Hays, R. D., & Fryback, D. G. (2007). Mode of administration is important in US national estimates of health-related quality of life. Medical Care, 45(12), 1171–1179.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Hays, R. D., Kim, S., Spritzer, K. L., et al. (2009). Effects of mode and order of administration on generic health-related quality of life scores. Value Health, 12(6), 1035–1039.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

13.

Agel, J., Rockwood, T., Mundt, J. C., et al. (2001). Comparison of interactive voice response and written self-administered patient surveys for clinical research. Orthopedics, 24(12), 1155–1157.PubMed

14.

Dunn, J. A., Arakawa, R., Greist, J. H., & Clayton, A. H. (2007). Assessing the onset of antidepressant-induced sexual dysfunction using interactive voice response technology. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 68(4), 525–532.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Rush, A. J., Bernstein, I. H., Trivedi, M. H., et al. (2006). An evaluation of the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology and the hamilton rating scale for depression: A sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression trial report. Biological Psychiatry, 59(6), 493–501.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

16.

Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., et al. (2007). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH Roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S3–S11.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

17.

Broderick, J. E., Schwartz, J. E., Vikingstad, G., et al. (2008). The accuracy of pain and fatigue items across different reporting periods. Pain, 139(1), 146–157.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

18.

Broderick, J. E., Schneider, S., Schwartz, J. E., & Stone, A. A. (2010). Interference with activities due to pain and fatigue: Accuracy of ratings across different reporting periods. Quality of Life Research, 19(8), 1163–1170.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

19.

Schneider, S., Stone, A. A., Schwartz, J. E., & Broderick, J. E. (2011). Peak and end effects in patients’ daily recall of pain and fatigue: A within-subjects analysis. J Pain, 12(2), 228–235.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

20.

Ware, J. E, Jr, Kosinski, M., Bayliss, M. S., et al. (1995). Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: Summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Medical Care, 33(4 Suppl), AS264–AS279.PubMed

21.

Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., et al. (2010). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1179–1194.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

22.

Ware, J. E, Jr, Snow, K. K., Kosinski, M., & Gandek, B. (1993). SF-36 health survey. Manual and interpretation guide. Boston: The Health institute, New England Medical Center.

23.

Hambleton, R. K., & Jones, R. W. (1993). An NCME Instructional Module on the comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(3), 38–47.CrossRef

24.

van der Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer.CrossRef

25.

Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., 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(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Kolen, M. L., & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test equating, scaling, and linking: Methods and practices. New York: Springer.CrossRef

27.

Chew, L. D., Bradley, K. A., & Boyko, E. J. (2004). Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Family Medicine, 36, 588–594.PubMed

28.

Muthen, B. O., & Muthen, L. (2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

29.

Hochberg, Y. (1988). A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika, 75, 800–803.CrossRef

30.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

31.

Coons, S. J., Gwaltney, C. J., Hays, R. D., et al. (2009). Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health, 12(4), 419–429.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Dillman, D. A., Phelps, G., Tortora, R., et al. (2009). Response rate and measurement differences in mixed-mode surveys using mail, telephone, interactive voice response (IVR) and the Internet. Social Science Research, 38, 1–18.CrossRef

Titel: Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative
Auteurs: Jakob B. Bjorner
Matthias Rose
Barbara Gandek
Arthur A. Stone
Doerte U. Junghaenel
John E. Ware Jr.
Publicatiedatum: 01-02-2014
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0451-4

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2014

Body mass index and health-related quality of life in apparently healthy individuals

Does self-management counseling in patients with heart failure improve quality of life? Findings from the Heart Failure Adherence and Retention Trial (HART)

Fluctuations in appraisal over time in the context of stable versus non-stable health

The use of focus groups to develop a culturally relevant quality of life tool for lymphatic filariasis in Bangladesh

Predictors of psychological well-being and stress among Jordanian menopausal women

A conceptual model of health-related quality of life in sarcoidosis