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 7/2020

18-02-2020

Validation and calibration of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system: Pediatric PROMIS® Emotional Distress domain item banks, Portuguese version (Brazil/Portugal)

Auteurs: Márcia N. F. de C. Pinto, Rogério de M. C. Pinto, Tânia M. da S. Mendonça, Camilla G. Souza, Carlos Henrique M. da Silva

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 7/2020

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

This paper goal was to validate the Portuguese version (Brazil/Portugal) of the Anger, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptoms item banks of the Pediatric PROMIS® Emotional Distress domain (version 1.0) for the Brazilian and Portuguese pediatric population.

Method

The total of 1216 participants answered a self-applied version of the Portuguese Anger, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptoms item banks. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and total information curve (TIC). Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with a bifactor model was used to confirm construct validity and IRT assumptions. Item calibration was performed according to Graded Response Model (GRM). Differential Item Functioning (DIF) was analyzed according the participants’ age, gender, health condition (healthy versus chronic disease), and language.

Results

Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.84) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.93) were accurate. Unidimensionality, Local Independency, and construct validity were verified by CFA (CFI = 0.93; TLI = 0.93; RMSEA = 0.05; χ2 = 3052.4 with DIF = 557 and P value = 0.595). GRM was adjusted, and Emotional Distress had a satisfactory coverage. DIF was not significant.

Conclusion

The results obtained indicate the adequacy of the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version (Brazil/Portugal) of the Anger, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptoms item banks of the Pediatric PROMIS® Emotional Distress domain.
vorige artikel Psychometric characteristics of the WHOQOL-SRPB Scale in a population of stroke survivors and caregivers
volgende artikel Psychometric properties of a single-item visual analog scale measuring goals of care in patients with advanced cancer
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
2.
Irwin, D. E., Stucky, B., Langer, M. M., Thissen, D., DeWitt, E. M., Lai, J.-S., et al. (2010). An item response analysis of the pediatric PROMIS anxiety and depressive symptoms scales. Quality of Life Research,19(4), 595–607.CrossRef
3.
Irwin, D. E., Stucky, B. D., Langer, M. M., Thissen, D., DeWitt, E. M., Lai, J.-S., et al. (2012). PROMIS Pediatric Anger Scale: An item response theory analysis. Quality of Life Research,21(4), 697–706.CrossRef
4.
Ader, D. N. (2007). Developing the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care,45(5 Suppl. 1), S1–S2.CrossRef
5.
Guyatt, G. H., Feeny, D. H., & Patrick, D. L. (1993). Measuring health-related quality of life. Annals of Internal Medicine,118(8), 622–629.CrossRef
6.
Baldwin, W. (2000). Information no one else knows: The value of self-report. In A. A. Stone, et al. (Eds.), The Science of Self-Report (pp. 3–7). London: LEA.
7.
Riley, W. T., Pilkonis, P. A., & Cella, D. (2011). Application of the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) to Mental Health Research. The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics,14(4), 201–208.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Katon, W. J. (2003). Clinical and health services relationships between major depression, depressive symptoms, and general medical illness. Society of Biological Psychiatry,54(3), 216–226.CrossRef
9.
American Psychiatric Association. (2014). DSM-5: Manual Diagnóstico e Estatístico de Transtornos Mentais (5th ed.). Porto Alegre: Artmed.
10.
Bayer, J. K., Rapee, R. M., Hiscock, H., Ukoumunne, O. C., Mihalopoulos, C., & Wake, M. (2011). Translational research to prevent internalizing problems early in childhood. Depression and Anxiety,28(1), 50–57.CrossRef
11.
Woodward, L. J., & Fergusson, D. M. (2001). Life course outcomes of young people with anxiety disorders in adolescence. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,40(9), 1086–1093.CrossRef
12.
Fleischmann, A., Bertolote, J. M., Belfer, M., & Beautrais, A. (2005). Completed suicide and psychiatric diagnoses in young people: A critical examination of the evidence. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,75(4), 676–683.CrossRef
13.
Cella, D., Gershon, R., Lai, J. S., & Choi, S. (2007). The future of outcomes measurement: Item banking, tailored shortforms, and computerized adaptive assessment. Quality of Life Research,16(Suppl. 1), 133–141.CrossRef
14.
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), 22–31.CrossRef
15.
Pinto, M. N. F. de C. (2014). Tradução e adaptação cultural dos bancos de itens dos domínios dificuldades emocionais e aspectos sociais do pediatric Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System - PROMIS pediatric® (versão 1.0) para a língua portuguesa. Master’s Thesis, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia.
16.
Eremenco, S. L., Cella, D., & Arnold, B. J. (2005). A comprehensive method for the Translation and Cross-Cultural Validation of Health status questionnaire. Evaluation and the Health Professions, Baltimore,8(2), 212–232.CrossRef
17.
Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: An international Delphi study. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation,19(4), 539–549. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11136-010-9606-8.CrossRef
18.
García-Pérez, M. A. (2017). An analysis of (dis)ordered categories, thresholds, and crossings in difference and divide-by-total IRT models for ordered responses. The Spanish Journal of Psychology,20, E10.CrossRef
19.
De Vet, H. C., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. L. (2011). Measurement in medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University.CrossRef
20.
McHorney, C. A., et al. (1994). The MOS 36 item short-form healthy survey (SF-36): III. Test of data quality, scaling assumptions and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care,32(1), 40–66.CrossRef
21.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika,16(3), 297–334.CrossRef
22.
23.
Winer, B. J., Brown, D. R., & Michels, K. M. (1991). Statistical principles in experimental design (3rd ed.). New York: MacGraw-Hill.
24.
Qin, S., Nelson, L., McLeod, L., Eremenco, S., & Coons, S. J. (2019). Assessing test-retest reliability of patient-reported outcome measures using intraclass correlation coefficients: Recommendations for selecting and documenting the analytical formula. Quality of Life Research,28(4), 1029–1033.CrossRef
25.
Weir, J. P. (2005). Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. Journal of Strength and conditioning Research,19(1), 231–240.PubMed
26.
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,60(1), 34–42.CrossRef
27.
Yuan, K. H. (2005). Fit indices versus test statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research,40, 115–148.CrossRef
28.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
29.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
30.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper Collins.
31.
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph RB-68-2. Princenton: Educational Testing Service.
32.
Thissen, D., Chen, W. H., & Bock, R. D. (2003). Multilog (version 7). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientifics Software International.
33.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, W. H. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park: Sage.
34.
Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Eric Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.
35.
Edelen, M. O., & Reeve, B. B. (2001). Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement. Quality of Life Research,16(Suppl. 1), 5–18.
36.
Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). Iordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software,39(8), 1–30.CrossRef
37.
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 liket-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
38.
39.
Harrison, D. A. (1986). Robustness of IRT parameter estimation to violations of the unidimensionality assumption. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics,11, 91–115.CrossRef
40.
41.
Polanczyk, G. V., Salum, G. A., Sugaya, L. S., Caye, A., & Rohde, L. A. (2015). Annual research review: A meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence of mental disorders in children and adolescents. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,56(3), 345–365.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Validation and calibration of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system: Pediatric PROMIS® Emotional Distress domain item banks, Portuguese version (Brazil/Portugal)
Auteurs
Márcia N. F. de C. Pinto
Rogério de M. C. Pinto
Tânia M. da S. Mendonça
Camilla G. Souza
Carlos Henrique M. da Silva
Publicatiedatum
18-02-2020
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 7/2020
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02447-z

Andere artikelen Uitgave 7/2020

Quality of Life Research 7/2020 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

The WHOQOL-BREF: a modern psychometric evaluation of its internal construct validity in people with multiple sclerosis

OriginalPaper

FDA review summary of patient-reported outcome results for ibrutinib in the treatment of chronic graft versus host disease

OriginalPaper

Pain catastrophizing mediates the negative influence of pain and trait-anxiety on health-related quality of life in fibromyalgia

OriginalPaper

Psychometric characteristics of the WHOQOL-SRPB Scale in a population of stroke survivors and caregivers

OriginalPaper

Predictive model of variables associated with health-related quality of life in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease receiving hemodialysis

OriginalPaper

Self-esteem in patients with inflammatory bowel disease