Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 5/2011

01-06-2011

Assessing the factor structure of a role functioning item bank

Auteurs: Milena D. Anatchkova, John E. Ware Jr., Jakob B. Bjorner

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2011

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

Role functioning (RF) is an important part of health-related quality of life, but is hard to measure due to the wide definition of roles and fluctuations in role participation. This study aims to explore the dimensionality of a newly developed item bank assessing the impact of health on RF.

Methods

A battery of measures with skip patterns including the new RF bank was completed by 2,500 participants answering only questions on social roles relevant to them. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted for the participants answering items from all conceptual domains (N = 1193). Conceptually based dimensionality and method effects reflecting positively and negatively worded items were explored in a series of models.

Results

A bi-factor model (CFI = .93, RMSEA = .08) with one general and four conceptual factors (social, family, occupation, generic) was retained. Positively worded items were excluded from the final solution due to misfit. While a single factor model with methods factors had a poor fit (CFI = .88, RMSEA = .13), high loadings on the general factor in the bi-factor model suggest that the RF bank is sufficiently unidimensional for IRT analysis.

Conclusions

The bank demonstrated sufficient unidimensionality for IRT-based calibration of all the items on a common metric and development of a computerized adaptive test.
vorige artikel Measurement properties of the Community Wellbeing Index in older adults
volgende artikel Psychometric properties of the Spanish form of the schedule for meaning in life evaluation (SMiLE)
Literatuur
1.
World Health Organization. (2002). Towards a common language for functioning, disability and health: ICF—the international classification of functioning, disability and health.
2.
Badley, E. M. (2008). Enhancing the conceptual clarity of the activity and participation components of the international classification of functioning, disability, and health. Social Science and Medicine, 66, 2335–2345.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Merikangas, K. R., Ames, M., Cui, L., Stang, P. E., Ustun, T. B., Von Korff, M., et al. (2007). The impact of comorbidity of mental and physical conditions on role disability in the US adult household population. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64, 1180–1188.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Druss, B. G., Hwang, I., Petukhova, M., Sampson, N. A., Wang, P. S., & Kessler, R. C. (2009). Impairment in role functioning in mental and chronic medical disorders in the united states: Results from the national comorbidity survey replication. Molecular Psychiatry, 14, 728–737.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Anatchkova, M. D., & Bjorner, J. B. (2010). Health and role functioning: The use of focus groups in the development of an item bank. Quality of Life Research, 19, 111–123.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Gandek, B., Sinclair, S. J., Jette, A. M., & Ware, J. E., Jr. (2007). Development and initial psychometric evaluation of the participation measure for post-acute care (PM-PAC). American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86, 57–71.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Haley, S. M., Gandek, B., Siebens, H., Black-Schaffer, R. M., Sinclair, S. J., Tao, W., et al. (2008). Computerized adaptive testing for follow-up after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation: II. Participation outcomes. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 89, 275–283.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Mulcahey, M. J., Haley, S. M., Duffy, T., Pengsheng, N., & Betz, R. R. (2008). Measuring physical functioning in children with spinal impairments with computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 28, 330–335.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Wilkie, D. J., Judge, M. K., Berry, D. L., Dell, J., Zong, S., & Gilespie, R. (2003). Usability of a computerized PAINReportIt in the general public with pain and people with cancer pain. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 25, 213–224.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Bjorner, J. B., Kosinski, M., & Ware, J. E., Jr. (2003). Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: An application of item response theory to the headache impact test (HIT). Quality of Life Research, 12, 913–933.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Bayliss, M. S., Dewey, J. E., Dunlap, I., Batenhorst, A. S., Cady, R., Diamond, M. L., et al. (2003). A study of the feasibility of internet administration of a computerized health survey: The headache impact test (HIT). Quality of Life Research, 12, 953–961.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Lai, J. S., Crane, P. K., & Cella, D. (2006). Factor analysis techniques for assessing sufficient unidimensionality of cancer related fatigue. Quality of Life Research, 15, 1179–1190.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Cook, K. F., Kallen, M. A., & Amtmann, D. (2009). Having a fit: Impact of number of items and distribution of data on traditional criteria for assessing IRT’s unidimensionality assumption. Quality of Life Research, 18, 447–460.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Reise, S. P., Morizot, J., & Hays, R. D. (2007). The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl 1), 19–31.PubMedCrossRef
15.
O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods Instruments Computers, 32, 396–402.CrossRef
16.
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.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Hankins, M. (2008). The factor structure of the twelve item general health questionnaire (GHQ-12): The result of negative phrasing? Clinical Practice of Epidemiology in Mental Health, 4, 10.CrossRef
19.
Horan, P. M., DiStefano, C., & Motl, R. W. (2003). Wording effects in self-esteem scales: Methodological artifact or response style? Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 435–455.CrossRef
20.
Ware, J. E., Jr., & Dewey, J. (2000). How to score version two of the SF-36 health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.
21.
Bjorner, J. B., Chang, C. H., Thissen, D., & Reeve, B. B. (2007). Developing tailored instruments: Item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16, 95–108.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Turner-Bowker, D. M., Anatchkova, M. D., Bjorner, J. B., Saris-Baglama, R. N., Chan, K. S., Huang, I., Wu, A. (2009). Preliminary development of a computerized adaptive test for health-related quality of life outcomes in HIV. The Quality of Life Research Journal.
23.
Marsh, H. W., & Grayson, D. (1995). Latent variable models of multitrait—multimethod data. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24.
Muthen, B., & Muthen, L. (1998). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.
25.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRef
26.
Brown, T. R. (2003). Confirmatory factor analysis of the penn state worry questionnaire: Multiple factors or method effects? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 1411–1426.PubMedCrossRef
27.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.CrossRef
28.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
29.
Chen, F. F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 189–225.CrossRef
30.
Chen, W. H., Revicki, D. A., Lai, J. S., Cook, K. F., & Amtmann, D. (2009). Linking pain items from two studies onto a common scale using item response theory. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 38, 615–628.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent child. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
Bachman, J. G., & O’Malley, P. M. (1986). Self-concepts, self-esteem, and educational experiences: The frog pond revisited (again). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 35–46.CrossRef
33.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
34.
Marsh, H. W. (1996). Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 810–819.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Tomas, J. M., & Oliver, A. (1999). Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale: Two factors or method effects. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 84–98.CrossRef
36.
Wang, J., Siegal, H. A., Falck, R. S., & Carlson, R. G. (2001). Factorial structure of Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale among crack-cocaine drug users. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 275–286.CrossRef
37.
Motl, R. W., & Conroy, D. E. (2000). Validity and factorial invariance of the social physique anxiety scale. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 32, 1007–1017.PubMed
38.
Chen, Y., Rendina-Gobioff, G., Dedrick, R. F. (2007). Detecting effects of positively and negatively worded items on a self-concept scale for third and sixth grade elementary students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Florida Educational Research Association (52nd, Tampa, FL, Nov 14–16, 2007).
Metagegevens
Titel
Assessing the factor structure of a role functioning item bank
Auteurs
Milena D. Anatchkova
John E. Ware Jr.
Jakob B. Bjorner
Publicatiedatum
01-06-2011
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2011
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9807-1

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2011

Quality of Life Research 5/2011 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Comparison of 7-day and repeated 24-h recall of type 2 diabetes

OriginalPaper

Changes in SWB following injury to different brain lobes

OriginalPaper

Predictors of quality of life in carers for people with a progressive neurological illness: a longitudinal study

OriginalPaper

Effect of atomoxetine on quality of life and family burden: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study in children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid oppositional defiant or conduct disorder

OriginalPaper

Measurement properties of the Community Wellbeing Index in older adults

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life in preschool children in five health conditions