Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1477-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
To expand content of the physical function domain of the Work Disability Functional Assessment Battery (WD-FAB), developed for the US Social Security Administration’s (SSA) disability determination process.
Newly developed questions were administered to 3532 recent SSA applicants for work disability benefits and 2025 US adults. Factor analyses and item response theory (IRT) methods were used to calibrate and link the new items to the existing WD-FAB, and computer-adaptive test simulations were conducted.
Factor and IRT analyses supported integration of 44 new items into three existing WD-FAB scales and the addition of a new 11-item scale (Community Mobility). The final physical function domain consisting of: Basic Mobility (56 items), Upper Body Function (34 items), Fine Motor Function (45 items), and Community Mobility (11 items) demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties.
The WD-FAB offers an important tool for enhancement of work disability determination. The FAB could provide relevant information about work-related functioning for initial assessment of claimants; identifying denied applicants who may benefit from interventions to improve work and health outcomes; enhancing periodic review of work disability beneficiaries; and assessing outcomes for policies, programs and services targeting people with work disability.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2007). The future of disability in America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Institute on Disability. (2016). 2015 annual disability statistics compendium. Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire.
Social Security Administration. (2014). Annual statistical report on the Social Security Disability Insurance program. Accessed April 21, 2016.
Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2007). Improving the social security disability decision process. Washington.
Ni, P. S., McDonough, C. M. J. A., Bogusz, K., Marfeo, E. E., Rasch, E. K., Brandt, D. E., et al. (2013). Development of a computer-adaptive physical function instrument for Social Security Administration disability determination. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,94, 1661–1669. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Geneva.
Rivers D. (2006). Sample matching: Representative sampling from internet panels. A white paper on the advantages of the sample matching methodology. Palo Alto, CA: Polimetrix, Inc.
Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CrossRef
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling,6, 1–55. CrossRef
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph,17(Suppl), 1–100. CrossRef
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further investigation of the performance of S-X2: An item fit index for use with dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement,27, 289–298. CrossRef
Thissen, D. (2009). The MEDPRO Project: An SBIR project for a comprehensive IRT and CAT software system- IRT software. Paper presented at GMAC conference on computerized adaptive testing, Minneapolis, MN.
Scientific Software International. (2011). IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling [computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL.
Langer, M. (2008). A reexamination of Lord’s Wald test for differential item functioning using item response theory and modern error estimation. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina.
Woods, C., Cai, L., & Wang, M. (2013). The Langer-improved Wald test for DIF testing with multiple groups: Evaluation and comparison to two-group IRT. Educational and Psychological Measurement,73, 532–547. CrossRef
Green, B. F., Bock, R. D., Humphreys, L. G., Linn, R. L., & Reckase, M. D. (1984). Technical guidelines for assessing computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement,21, 347–360. CrossRef
- Improving measures of work-related physical functioning
Christine M. McDonough
Elizabeth E. Marfeo
Molly E. Marino
Elizabeth K. Rasch
Diane E. Brandt
Alan M. Jette
- Springer International Publishing