Top

Gepubliceerd in:

13-01-2022

Linking the RCADS-25 to the PROMIS^® pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in a general Dutch population sample

Auteurs: Leonie Klaufus, Xiaodan Tang, Eva Verlinden, Marcel van der Wal, Lotte Haverman, Michiel Luijten, Pim Cuijpers, Mai Chinapaw, Benjamin Schalet

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2022

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to link scores of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale short version (RCADS-25) to the metric of the PROMIS pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in a general Dutch population sample.

Methods

The RCADS-25 and PROMIS pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms were administered online to 2,893 Dutch children and adolescents aged 8–18. Assumptions for linking methods were checked. Linking was achieved by using three item response theory (IRT) and two equipercentile methods. For each method, the observed PROMIS metric scores were compared to the ones predicted from the RCADS-25 subscale scores using correlations, mean and SD of differences, and RMSD.

Results

The assumptions for IRT-based and equipercentile linking were met. The IRT-based method using separate calibration with Stocking-Lord constants was considered the optimal choice for linking both RCADS-25 subscales to the PROMIS metric. Based on this Stocking-Lord approach, we created item parameters for RCADS-25 items and two crosswalk tables.

Conclusion

The RCADS-25 item parameters and crosswalk tables presented in this study are sufficiently valid. Researchers can use these products to translate the RCADS-25 anxiety and depression subscales scores to the PROMIS metric in order to ensure comparability with the previous research.

vorige artikel Development of an observer-reported outcome measure to capture the signs and impact of fever distress symptoms in infants and young children

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Krause, K. R., Chung, S., Adewuya, A. O., Albano, A. M., Babins-Wagner, R., Birkinshaw, L., Brann, P., Creswell, C., Delanay, K., Falissard, B., Forrest, C. B., Hudson, J. L., Ishikawa, S., Khatwani, M., Kieling, C., Krause, J., Malik, K., Martínez, V., Mughal, F., & Wolpert, M. (2021). International consensus on a standard set of outcome measures for child and youth anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The Lancet Psychiatry, 8(1), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30356-4CrossRefPubMed

Baguley, T. (2009). Standardized or simple effect size: What should be reported? British Journal of Psychology, 100(3), 603–617. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712608X377117CrossRefPubMed

Schalet, B. D., Cook, K. F., Choi, S. W., & Cella, D. (2014). Establishing a common metric for self-reported anxiety: Linking the MASQ, PANAS, and GAD-7 to PROMIS Anxiety. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 28(1), 88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2013.11.006CrossRefPubMed

Schalet, B. D., Rothrock, N. E., Hays, R. D., Kazis, L. E., Cook, K. F., Rutsohn, J. P., & Cella, D. (2015). Linking physical and mental health summary scores from the Veterans RAND 12-item health survey (VR-12) to the PROMIS^® Global Health scale. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 30(10), 1524–1530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-015-3453-9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement. Standard sets. Retrieved January 21, 2021, from https://www.ichom.org/standard-sets/

Chorpita, B. F., Yim, L., Moffitt, C., Umemoto, L. A., & Francis, S. E. (2000). Assessment of symptoms of DSM-IV anxiety and depression in children: A revised child anxiety and depression Scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38(8), 835–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00130-8CrossRefPubMed

Ebesutani, C., Reise, S. P., Chorpita, B. F., Ale, C., Regan, J., Young, J., Higa-McMillan, C., & Weisz, J. R. (2012). The revised child anxiety and depression scale-short version: Scale reduction via exploratory bifactor modeling of the broad anxiety factor. Psychological Assessment, 24(4), 833–845. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027283CrossRefPubMed

Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., Ader, D., Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., & Rose, M. (2007). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(5 suppl 1), S3–S11. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Irwin, D. E., Stucky, B., Langer, M. M., Thissen, D., Dewitt, E. M., Lai, J. S., Varni, J. W., Yeatts, K., & DeWalt, D. A. (2010). An item response analysis of the pediatric PROMIS anxiety and depressive symptoms scales. Quality of Life Research, 19(4), 595–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9619-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

American Psychiatric Association. (2021). Online Assessment Measures. Retrieved March 29, 2021, from https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/educational-resources/assessment-measures

11.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2013). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Psychology Press.CrossRef

12.

Klaufus, L. H., Luijten, M. A. J., Verlinden, E., Van der Wal, M. F., Haverman, L., Cuijpers, P., et al. (2021). Psychometric properties of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in a general population. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02852-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Choi, S. W., Schalet, B., Cook, K. F., & Cella, D. (2014). Establishing a common metric for depressive symptoms: Linking the BDI-II, CES-D, and PHQ-9 to PROMIS depression. Psychological Assessment, 26(2), 513–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035768CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Klaufus, L., Verlinden, E., Van der Wal, M., Kösters, M., Cuijpers, P., & Chinapaw, M. (2020). Psychometric evaluation of two short versions of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale. BMC Psychiatry, 20, 47. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-2444-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (2014). Test Equating, Scaling, and Linking: Methods and Practices. Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRef

16.

Kaat, A. J., Schalet, B. D., Rutsohn, J., Jensen, R. E., & Cella, D. (2018). Physical function metric over measure: An illustration with the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) and the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT). Cancer, 124(1), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30981CrossRefPubMed

17.

Schalet, B. D., Revicki, D. A., Cook, K. F., Krishnan, E., Fries, J. F., & Cella, D. (2015). Establishing a common metric for physical function: Linking the HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF subscale to PROMIS(^®) Physical Function. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 30(10), 1517–1523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-015-3360-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Stocking, M. L., & Lord, F. M. (1983). Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168300700208.CrossRef

19.

Thissen, D., Varni, J. W., Stucky, B. D., Liu, Y., Irwin, D. E., & DeWalt, D. A. (2011). Using the PedsQL 3.0 asthma module to obtain scores comparable with those of the PROMIS pediatric asthma impact scale (PAIS). Quality of Life Research, 20(9), 1497–1505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9874-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Kang, T., & Petersen, N. S. (2012). Linking item parameters to a base scale. Asia Pacific Education Review, 13(2), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-011-9197-2CrossRef

21.

Thissen, D., Pommerich, M., Billeaud, K., & Williams, V. S. (1995). Item response theory for scores on tests including polytomous items with ordered responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19(1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169501900105CrossRef

22.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005CrossRef

23.

Hancock, G. R., Mueller, R. O., & Stapleton, L. M. (2010). The Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences. Routledge.CrossRef

24.

Hu, L. T., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118CrossRef

25.

McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

26.

Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. J. P. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ω_H: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7CrossRef

27.

Reise, S. P., Bonifay, W. E., & Haviland, M. G. (2013). Scoring and modeling psychological measures in the presence of multidimensionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2012.725437CrossRefPubMed

28.

Aaronson, N., Alonso, J., Burnam, A., Lohr, K. N., Patrick, D. L., Perrin, E., & Stein, R. E. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11(3), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015291021312CrossRefPubMed

29.

Revelle, W. (2019). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Northwestern University. R package version 1.9.12. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych

30.

Choi, S. W., Lim, S., Schalet, B. D., Kaat, A. J., & Cella, D. (2020). PROsetta: Linking Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures. R package version 0.2.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=PROsetta.

31.

Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., Widaman, K. F., & Haviland, M. G. (2013). Multidimensionality and structural coefficient bias in structural equation modeling: A bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164412449831CrossRef

32.

Schalet, B. D., Janulis, P., Kipke, M. D., Mustanski, B., Shoptaw, S., Moore, R., Baum, M., Kim, S., Siminski, S., Ragsdale, A., & Gorback, P. M. (2020). Psychometric data linking across HIV and substance use cohorts. AIDS and Behavior, 24(11), 3215–3224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-020-02883-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Choi, S. W., Podrabsky, T., McKninney, N., Schalet, B. D., Cook, K. F., & Cella, D. PROsetta Stone® Methodology: A Rosetta Stone for patient reported outcomes. Retrieved March 22, 2021, from http://www.prosettastone.org/Methodology/Documents/PROSetta%20Methodology%20Report.pdf

34.

Dorans, N. J. (2004). Equating, concordance, and expectation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28(4), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621604265031CrossRef

35.

Cai, L., Thissen, D., & du Toit, S. (2011). IRTPRO 2.01. Scientific Software International.

36.

Choi, S. W. (2009). Firestar: Computerized adaptive testing simulation program for polytomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33(8), 644–645. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621608329892CrossRef

37.

Cook, K. F., Schalet, B. D., Kallen, M. A., Rutsohn, J. P., & Cella, D. (2015). Establishing a common metric for self-reported pain: Linking BPI pain interference and SF-36 bodily pain subscale scores to the PROMIS pain interference metric. Quality of Life Research, 24(10), 2305–2318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0987-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Linking the RCADS-25 to the PROMIS® pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in a general Dutch population sample
Auteurs: Leonie Klaufus
Xiaodan Tang
Eva Verlinden
Marcel van der Wal
Lotte Haverman
Michiel Luijten
Pim Cuijpers
Mai Chinapaw
Benjamin Schalet
Publicatiedatum: 13-01-2022
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2022
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03050-6

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2022

Factors associated with impaired quality of life three months after being diagnosed with COVID-19

Health-related quality of life among elderly breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy: a U.S Medicare population-based study

Is malnutrition a determining factor of health-related quality of life in hemodialysis patients? A cross-sectional design examining relationships with a comprehensive assessment of nutritional status

Validation and comparison of five preference-based measures among age-related macular degeneration patients: evidence from mainland China

Patient-reported outcome measures in Arabic-speaking populations: a systematic review

Joint modelling with competing risks of dropout for longitudinal analysis of health-related quality of life in cancer clinical trials