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 1/2014

01-02-2014

Few items in the thyroid-related quality of life instrument ThyPRO exhibited differential item functioning

Auteurs: Torquil Watt, Mogens Groenvold, Laszlo Hegedüs, Steen Joop Bonnema, Åse Krogh Rasmussen, Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen, Jakob Bue Bjorner

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

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

Objective

To evaluate the extent of differential item functioning (DIF) within the thyroid-specific quality of life patient-reported outcome measure, ThyPRO, according to sex, age, education and thyroid diagnosis.

Study design and setting

A total of 838 patients with benign thyroid diseases completed the ThyPRO questionnaire (84 five-point items, 13 scales). Uniform and nonuniform DIF were investigated using ordinal logistic regression, testing for both statistical significance and magnitude (∆R 2 > 0.02). Scale level was estimated by the sum score, after purification.

Results

Twenty instances of DIF in 17 of the 84 items were found. Eight according to diagnosis, where the goiter scale was the one most affected, possibly due to differing perceptions in patients with auto-immune thyroid diseases compared to patients with simple goiter. Eight DIFs according to age were found, of which 5 were in positively worded items, which younger patients were more likely to endorse; one according to gender: women were more likely to report crying, and three according to educational level. The vast majority of DIF had only minor influence on the scale scores (0.1–2.3 points on the 0–100 scales), but two DIF corresponded to a difference of 4.6 and 9.8, respectively.

Conclusion

Ordinal logistic regression identified DIF in 17 of 84 items. The potential impact of this on the present scales was low, but items displaying DIF could be avoided when developing abbreviated scales, where the potential impact of DIF (due to fewer items) will be larger.
vorige artikel The development and validation of the Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16)© to assess the impact of disease on the partner or family member
volgende artikel Evaluation of the similarities and differences in response patterns to the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory and the Child Oral Health Impact Scores among youth with cleft
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Revicki, D. A., Osoba, D., Fairclough, D., Barofsky, I., Berzon, R., Leidy, N. K., et al. (2000). Recommendations on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States. Quality of Life Research, 9(8), 887–900.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Snyder, C. F., Aaronson, N. K., Choucair, A. K., Elliott, T. E., Greenhalgh, J., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2012). Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: A review of the options and considerations. Quality of Life Research, 21(8), 1305–1314.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Karvouni, A., Kouri, I., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2009). Reporting and interpretation of SF-36 outcomes in randomised trials: Systematic review. BMJ, 338, a3006.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
4.
Fayers P. M., & Hays R. D. (2004). Assessing quality of life in clinical trials—Methods and practice (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5.
Carle, A., Laurberg, P., Pedersen, I. B., Knudsen, N., Perrild, H., Ovesen, L., et al. (2006). Epidemiology of subtypes of hypothyroidism in Denmark. European Journal of Endocrinology, 154(1), 21–28.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Carle, A., Pedersen, I. B., Knudsen, N., Perrild, H., Ovesen, L., Rasmussen, L. B., et al. (2011). Epidemiology of subtypes of hyperthyroidism in Denmark: A population-based study. European Journal of Endocrinology, 164(5), 801–809.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Watt, T., Groenvold, M., Rasmussen, A. K., Bonnema, S. J., Hegedüs, L., Bjorner, J. B., et al. (2006). Quality of life in patients with benign thyroid disorders. A review. European Journal of Endocrinology, 154, 501–510.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Watt, T., Hegedüs, L., Rasmussen, A. K., Groenvold, M., Bonnema, S. J., Bjorner, J. B., et al. (2007). Which domains of thyroid-related quality of life are most relevant? Patients and clinicians provide complementary perspectives. Thyroid, 17(7), 647–654.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Watt, T., Rasmussen, A. K., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Watt, S. H., Bonnema, S. J., et al. (2008). Improving a newly developed patient-reported outcome for thyroid patients, using cognitive interviewing. Quality of Life Research, 17(7), 1009–1017.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Watt, T., Bjorner, J. B., Groenvold, M., Rasmussen, A. K., Bonnema, S. J., Hegedüs, L., et al. (2009). Establishing construct validity for the thyroid-specific patient reported outcome measure (ThyPRO): An initial examination. Quality of Life Research, 18(4), 483–496.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Watt, T., Hegedüs, L., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Rasmussen, A. K., Bonnema, S. J., et al. (2010). Validity and reliability of the novel thyroid-specific quality of life questionnaire, ThyPRO. European Journal of Endocrinology, 162(1), 161–167.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Mellenberg, G. J. (1982). Contingency table models for assessing item bias. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7(2), 105–118.CrossRef
13.
Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Gerrard, M. (1986). Beyond group-mean differences: The concept of item bias. Psychological Bulletin, 99(1), 118–128.CrossRef
14.
Swaminathan, A. P., & Rogers, J. H. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(4), 361–370.CrossRef
15.
French, A. W., & Miller, T. R. (1996). Logistic regression and its use in detecting differential item functioning in polytomous items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33(3), 315–332.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(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Teresi, J. A., & Fleishman, J. A. (2007). Differential item functioning and health assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl 1), 33–42.PubMedCrossRef
18.
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(Suppl 1), 95–108.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenzel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity. Hillsdale, NJ.
20.
Muthen, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49(1), 115–132.CrossRef
21.
Teresi, J. A. (2006). Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications. Advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S152–S170.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF). Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores (1st ed.). Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
23.
Crane, P. K., Gibbons, L. E., Jolley, L., & van Belle, G. (2006). Differential item functioning analysis with ordinal logistic regression techniques. DIFdetect and difwithpar. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S115–S123.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Cook, K. F., Teal, C. R., Bjorner, J. B., Cella, D., Chang, C. H., Crane, P. K., et al. (2007). IRT health outcomes data analysis project: An overview and summary. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl 1), 121–132.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Jodoin, M. G., & Gierl, M. J. (2001). Evaluating Type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(4), 329–349.CrossRef
26.
Nagelkerke, N. J. D. (1991). A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika, 78(3), 691–692.CrossRef
27.
Bjorner, J. B., & Pejtersen, J. H. (2010). Evaluating construct validity of the second version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire through analysis of differential item functioning and differential item effect. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 38(3 Suppl), 90–105.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2007). The use of differential item functioning analyses to identify cultural differences in responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 115–129.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Hidalgo, M. D., & Lopez-Pina, J. A. (2004). Differential item functioning detection and effect size: A comparison between logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(6), 903–915.CrossRef
30.
Crane, P. K., Gibbons, L. E., Ocepek-Welikson, K., Cook, K., Cella, D., Narasimhalu, K., et al. (2007). A comparison of three sets of criteria for determining the presence of differential item functioning using ordinal logistic regression. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl 1), 69–84.PubMedCrossRef
31.
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(8), 913–933.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Martin, M., Blaisdell, B., Kwong, J. W., & Bjorner, J. B. (2004). The Short-Form Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) was psychometrically equivalent in nine languages. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 57(12), 1271–1278.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Schmidt, S., Debensason, D., Muhlan, H., Petersen, C., Power, M., Simeoni, M. C., et al. (2006). The DISABKIDS generic quality of life instrument showed cross-cultural validity. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(6), 587–598.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Schmidt, S., Muhlan, H., & Power, M. (2006). The EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index: Psychometric results of a cross-cultural field study. European Journal of Public Health, 16(4), 420–428.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Zwick, R. (1990). When do item response function and Mantel-Haenszel definitions of differential item functioning coincide? Journal of Educational Statistics, 15(3), 185–197.CrossRef
36.
French, B. F., & Maller, S. J. (2007). Iterative purification and effect size use with logistic regression for differential item functioning detection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(3), 373–393.CrossRef
37.
SAS Institute Inc. (2004). SAS/STAT 9.1 user’s guide (4th ed.). Cary: SAS Institue Inc.
38.
Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41(5), 582–592.PubMed
39.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2009). Differential item functioning (DIF) in the EORTC QLQ-C30: A comparison of baseline, on-treatment and off-treatment data. Quality of Life Research, 18(3), 381–388.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Teresi, J. A., Ramirez, M., Jones, R. N., Choi, S., & Crane, P. K. (2012). Modifying measures based on differential item functioning (DIF) impact analyses. Journal of Aging and Health, 24(6), 1044–1076.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Lai, J. S., Teresi, J., & Gershon, R. (2005). Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 28(3), 283–294.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2009). A simulation study provided sample size guidance for differential item functioning (DIF) studies using short scales. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(3), 288–295.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Navas-Ara, M. J., & Gomez-Benito, J. (2002). Effects of ability scale purification on the identification of DIF. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(1), 9–15.CrossRef
44.
Gelin, M. N., & Zumbo, B. D. (2003). Differential item functioning results may change depending on how an item is scored: An illustration with the center for epidemiologic studies depression scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(1), 65–74.CrossRef
45.
Yang, F. M., & Jones, R. N. (2007). Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) item response bias found with Mantel-Haenszel method was successfully replicated using latent variable modeling. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(11), 1195–1200.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
46.
Cole, S. R., Kawachi, I., Maller, S. J., & Berkman, L. F. (2000). Test of item-response bias in the CES-D scale. Experience from the New Haven EPESE study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(3), 285–289.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Teresi, J. A., Ocepek-Welikson, K., Kleinman, M., Eimicke, J. P., Crane, P. K., Jones, R. N., et al. (2009). Analysis of differential item functioning in the depression item bank from the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS): An item response theory approach. Psychology Science Quarterly, 51(2), 148–180.PubMedCentralPubMed
48.
Gibbons, R. D., & Hedeker, D. (1992). Full-information item bi-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 57(3), 423–436.CrossRef
49.
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
Metagegevens
Titel
Few items in the thyroid-related quality of life instrument ThyPRO exhibited differential item functioning
Auteurs
Torquil Watt
Mogens Groenvold
Laszlo Hegedüs
Steen Joop Bonnema
Åse Krogh Rasmussen
Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen
Jakob Bue Bjorner
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/s11136-013-0462-1

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2014

Quality of Life Research 1/2014 Naar de uitgave

Review

Effectiveness of psychoeducational support on quality of life in early-stage breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OriginalPaper

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

Erratum

Erratum to: Understanding appraisal processes underlying the thentest: a mixed methods investigation

OriginalPaper

PROMIS® Parent Proxy Report Scales for children ages 5–7 years: an item response theory analysis of differential item functioning across age groups

OriginalPaper

Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)

OriginalPaper

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