Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-09-2010

Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): item bank development and testing

Auteurs: Elizabeth A. Hahn, Robert F. DeVellis, Rita K. Bode, Sofia F. Garcia, Liana D. Castel, Susan V. Eisen, Hayden B. Bosworth, Allen W. Heinemann, Nan Rothrock, David Cella, on behalf of the PROMIS Cooperative Group

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 7/2010

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

To develop a social health measurement framework, to test items in diverse populations and to develop item response theory (IRT) item banks.

Methods

A literature review guided framework development of Social Function and Social Relationships sub-domains. Items were revised based on patient feedback, and Social Function items were field-tested. Analyses included exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), two-parameter IRT modeling and evaluation of differential item functioning (DIF).

Results

The analytic sample included 956 general population respondents who answered 56 Ability to Participate and 56 Satisfaction with Participation items. EFA and CFA identified three Ability to Participate sub-domains. However, because of positive and negative wording, and content redundancy, many items did not fit the IRT model, so item banks do not yet exist. EFA, CFA and IRT identified two preliminary Satisfaction item banks. One item exhibited trivial age DIF.

Conclusion

After extensive item preparation and review, EFA-, CFA- and IRT-guided item banks help provide increased measurement precision and flexibility. Two Satisfaction short forms are available for use in research and clinical practice. This initial validation study resulted in revised item pools that are currently undergoing testing in new clinical samples and populations.
vorige artikel Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life among African-Americans in a lifestyle weight loss program
volgende artikel Relevant content for a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire for use in oncology clinical practice: Putting doctors and patients on the same page
Literatuur
1.
Cella, D., & Chang, C. H. (2000). A discussion of item response theory (IRT) and its applications in health status assessment. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), 1166–1172.
2.
Hays, R. D., Morales, L. S., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl II), 28–42.
3.
Bode, R. K., Lai, J. S., Cella, D., & Heinemann, A. W. (2003). Issues in the development of an item bank. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84(4 Suppl 2), S52–S60.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Bode, R. K., Gershon, R., & Lai, J. S. (2006). Item banks and their potential applications to health status assessment in diverse populations. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S189–S197.
5.
Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., et al. (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.
6.
World Health Organization. (1946). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization.
7.
House, J. S., & Kahn, R. L. (1985). Measures and concepts of social support. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 83–108). New York, NY: Academic Press.
8.
Haines, V. A., & Hurlbert, J. S. (1992). Network range and health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33(3), 254–266.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Berkman, L., Glass, T., Berkman, L., & Kawachi, I. (2000). Social integration, social methods, social support, and health. In L. Berkman & I. Kawachi (Eds.), Social epidemiology (pp. 137–173). New York: Oxford University Press.
10.
Weissman, M. M., & Bothwell, S. (1976). Assessment of social adjustment by patient self-report. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33(9), 1111–1115.PubMed
11.
Henderson, S., Duncan-Jones, P., Byrne, D. G., & Scott, R. (1980). Measuring social relationships. The interview schedule for social interaction. Psychological Medicine, 10(4), 723–734.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Birchwood, M., Smith, J., Cochrane, R., Wetton, S., & Copestake, S. (1990). The social functioning scale. The development and validation of a new scale of social adjustment for use in family intervention programmes with schizophrenic patients. British Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 853–859.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Eisen, S. V., Normand, S. L. T., Belanger, A. J., Gevorkian, S., & Irvin, E. A. (1994). BASIS-32 and the revised behavioral symptom identification scale (BASIS-R). In M. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcome assessment (3rd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 759–790). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
Dijkers, M. P., Whiteneck, G., & El Jaroudi, R. (2000). Measures of social outcomes in disability research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 81(12 Suppl 2), S63–S80.
15.
16.
Brekke, J. S., Long, J. D., & Kay, D. D. (2002). The structure and invariance of a model of social functioning in schizophrenia. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 190(2), 63–72.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., Baer, B. A., Ureno, G., & Villasenor, V. S. (1988). Inventory of interpersonal problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 885–892.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Wills, T. A. (1985). Supportive functions of interpersonal relationships. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 61–82). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.
19.
Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Bode, R. K., & Hanrahan, R. T. (2010). Measuring social well-being in people with chronic illness. Social Indicators Research, 96, 381–401.
20.
DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., & Stone, A. A. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S12–S21.
21.
Castel, L. D., Williams, K. A., Bosworth, H. B., Eisen, S. V., Hahn, E. A., Irwin, D. E., et al. (2008). Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: A qualitative analysis of focus-group data. Quality of Life Research, 17(5), 737–749.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A. A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B. B., Yount, S., et al. (2009). Initial item banks and first wave testing of the patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) network: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (in press).
23.
Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K., & Cella, D. (2009). Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 873–880.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Ware, J. E., Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Brucker, P. S., Yost, K., Cashy, J., Webster, K., & Cella, D. (2005). General population and cancer patient norms for the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general (FACT-G). Evaluation & The Health Professions, 28(2), 192–211.CrossRef
26.
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.
27.
28.
Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2006). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.
29.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRef
30.
Gibbons, R., & Hedeker, D. (1992). Full-information item bi-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 57(3), 423–436.CrossRef
31.
McDonald, R. P. (1981). The dimensionality of test and items. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100–117.
32.
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, No. 17.
33.
Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG user’s guide. Multiple, categorical item analysis and test scoring using item response theory. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
34.
van der Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer.
35.
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 50–64.CrossRef
36.
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further examination of the performance of S-X2, an item fit index for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 289–298.CrossRef
37.
Thissen, D. (2003). IRTLRDIF-Software for the computation of the statistics involved in item response theory likelihood-ratio test for differential item functioning (Version 2.0b).
38.
Garcia, S. F., Cella, D., Clauser, S. B., Flynn, K. E., Lai, J. S., Reeve, B. B., et al. (2007). Standardizing patient-reported outcomes assessment in cancer clinical trials: a patient-reported outcomes measurement information system initiative. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25(32), 5106–5112.CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): item bank development and testing
Auteurs
Elizabeth A. Hahn
Robert F. DeVellis
Rita K. Bode
Sofia F. Garcia
Liana D. Castel
Susan V. Eisen
Hayden B. Bosworth
Allen W. Heinemann
Nan Rothrock
David Cella
on behalf of the PROMIS Cooperative Group
Publicatiedatum
01-09-2010
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 7/2010
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9654-0

Andere artikelen Uitgave 7/2010

Monitoring symptoms at home: what methods would cancer patients be comfortable using?

  • Brief Communication

The internal consistency and construct validity of the partners in health scale: validation of a patient rated chronic condition self-management measure

Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life among African-Americans in a lifestyle weight loss program

New Australian population scoring coefficients for the old version of the SF-36 and SF-12 health status questionnaires

Quality of life of individuals with and without facial feminization surgery or gender reassignment surgery

  • Original Paper

Structure of health-related quality of life among people with and without functional limitations