Top

Quality of Life Research

Gepubliceerd in:

01-04-2013

Measurement invariance of the PROMIS pain interference item bank across community and clinical samples

Auteurs: Jiseon Kim, Hyewon Chung, Dagmar Amtmann, Dennis A. Revicki, Karon F. Cook

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 3/2013

Abstract

Purpose

This study examined the measurement invariance of responses to the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) pain interference (PI) item bank. The original PROMIS calibration sample (Wave I) was augmented with a sample of persons recruited from the American Chronic Pain Association (ACPA) to increase the number of participants reporting higher levels of pain. Establishing measurement invariance of an item bank is essential for the valid interpretation of group differences in the latent concept being measured.

Methods

Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MG-CFA) was used to evaluate successive levels of measurement invariance: configural, metric, and scalar invariance.

Results

Support was found for configural and metric invariance of the PROMIS-PI, but not for scalar invariance.

Conclusions and recommendations

Based on our results of MG-CFA, we recommend retaining the original parameter estimates obtained by combining the community sample of Wave I and ACPA participants. Future studies should extend this study by examining measurement equivalence in an item response theory framework such as differential item functioning analysis.

vorige artikel Content-balancing strategy in bifactor computerized adaptive patient-reported outcome measurement

volgende artikel Cross-cultural evaluation of the French version of the LEIPAD, a health-related quality of life instrument for use in the elderly living at home

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Farrar, J. T., Haythornthwaite, J. A., Jensen, M. P., & Katz, N. P. (2005). Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain, 113(1–2), 9–19.PubMedCrossRef

Amtmann, D., Cook, K., Jensen, M. P., Chen, W.-H., Choi, S., Revicki, D., et al. (2010). Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain, 150(1), 173–182.PubMedCrossRef

Riley, W., Rothrock, N., Bruce, B., Christodolou, C., Cook, K., & Hahn, E. A. (2010). Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) domain names and definitions revisions: further assessment of content validity in IRT-derived item banks. Quality of Life Research, 19(9), 1311–1321.PubMedCrossRef

Choi, S. W., Cook, K. F., & Dodd, B. G. (1997). Parameter recovery for the partial credit model using MULTILOG. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 1(2), 114–142.PubMed

Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, 34 (4, Pt. 2, No 17).

Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). Initial item banks and first wave testing of the patient–reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) network: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1179–1194.PubMedCrossRef

Liu, H. H., Cella, D., Gershon, R., Shen, J., Morales, L. S., Riley, W., et al. (2010). Representativeness of the PROMIS Internet panel. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1169–1178.PubMedCrossRef

Rothrock, N. E., Hays, R. D., Spritzer, K., Yount, S. E., Riley, W., & Cella, D. (2010). Relative to the general US population, chronic diseases are associated with poorer health–related quality of life as measured by the patient–reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1195–1204.PubMedCrossRef

Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis, and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543.CrossRef

10.

Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117–144.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Steenkamp, E. M. J., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90.CrossRef

12.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). Mplus user’s guide. 6th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

13.

Bentler, P. M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. Annual Review of Psychology, 31(1), 419–456.CrossRef

14.

Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.CrossRef

15.

Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

16.

Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980). Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. In Paper presented at the annual spring meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA.

17.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRef

18.

Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. Bollen & J. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). London, England: Sage.

19.

Marsh, H. W., Hau, K., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11(3), 320–341.CrossRef

20.

Sivo, S. A., Fan, X., Witta, E. L., & Willse, J. T. (2006). The search for “optimal” cutoff properties: Fit index criteria in structural equation modeling. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74(3), 267–288.CrossRef

21.

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indices for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRef

22.

French, B. F., & Finch, W. H. (2006). Confirmatory factor analytic procedures for the determination of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13(3), 378–402.CrossRef

23.

Mora, P. A., Contrada, R. J., Berkowitz, A., Musumeci-Szabo, T., Wisnivesky, J., & Halm, E. A. (2009). Measurement invariance of the mini asthma quality of life questionnaire across African–American and Latino adult asthma patients. Quality of Life Research, 18(3), 371–380.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Hill, C.D., Edwards, M.C., Thissen, D., Langer, M.M., Wirth, R.J., Burwinkle, T. M., et al. (2007). Practical issues in the application of item response theory: A demonstration using items from the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ (PedsQL™) 4.0 Generic Core Scales. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), 39–47.

25.

Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 552–567.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Chen, F., Sousa, K. H., & West, S. G. (2005). Teacher’s corner: Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 12(3), 471–492.CrossRef

27.

Yen, W. M. (1993). Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 187–213.CrossRef

28.

Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (1996). Uses of item response theory and the testlet concept in the measurement of psychopathology. Psychological Methods, 1, 81–97.CrossRef

29.

Stark, S., Chernshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292–1306.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Measurement invariance of the PROMIS pain interference item bank across community and clinical samples
Auteurs: Jiseon Kim
Hyewon Chung
Dagmar Amtmann
Dennis A. Revicki
Karon F. Cook
Publicatiedatum: 01-04-2013
Uitgeverij: Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 3/2013
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0191-x

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions and recommendations

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2013

Evaluation of the French version of the 4-item index of the Acne-QoL (AcneQ4fr)

Reliability and validity of the Thai version of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0

Psychosocial and emotional adjustment for children with pediatric cancer and their primary caregivers and the impact on their health-related quality of life during the first 6 months

Socio-behavioral predictors of self-reported oral health-related quality of life

Depression and anxiety symptoms in bronchiectasis: associations with health-related quality of life

Environmental risk and protective factors of adolescents’ and youths’ mental health: differences between parents’ appraisal and self-reports