Top

Quality of Life Research

Gepubliceerd in:

01-08-2015

Testing parent dyad interchangeability in the parent proxy-report of PedsQL™ 4.0: a differential item functioning analysis

Auteurs: Marziyeh Doostfatemeh, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi Ayatollahi, Peyman Jafari

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 8/2015

Abstract

Purpose

In child–parent agreement studies in the field of paediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL), little attention has been paid to the effect of gender in parental proxy rating of children’s HRQoL. This study aims to test the potential interchangeability of parent dyads in reporting children’s HRQoL on both item and scale levels of the PedsQL™ 4.0 instrument, using the approach of differential item functioning (DIF).

Methods

The PedsQL™ 4.0 Generic Core Scales were completed by 576 father-and-mother dyads. A polytomous item response theory model, graded response model, was used to detect DIF across fathers and mothers.

Result

Assessment at item level showed that fathers and mothers perceived the meaning of items of the PedsQL™ 4.0 consistently. Regarding the scale level, a moderate to high level of agreement was observed between mothers’ and fathers’ reports on all similar subscales. Although the significant mean score differences in total, physical and emotional functioning indicated that fathers gave higher scores to their children, the small effect size implied that this difference may not be practically meaningful.

Conclusion

Our findings revealed that discrepancy in parent dyads in rating children’s HRQoL is a “real” difference and not an artefact due to measurement non-invariance. Fathers were seen to have slightly different insights into their children, especially for emotional functioning, but overall the results were not all that different. This suggests that paternal proxy-reports can be included in studies along with maternal proxy-reports, and the two may be combined when looking at parent–child agreement. Parent–child agreement studies in Iran are not affected by parents’ gender, and therefore, researchers may rely on the assumption of the interchangeability of fathers and mothers in these studies.

vorige artikel Item-level informant discrepancies between children and their parents on the PROMIS® pediatric scales

volgende artikel Equivalence of electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome measures

Eiser, C., & Morse, R. (2001). Can parents rate their child’s health-related quality of life? Results of a systematic review. Quality of Life Research, 10(4), 347–357. doi:10.1023/A:1012253723272.PubMedCrossRef

Upton, P., Lawford, J., & Eiser, C. (2008). Parent-child agreement across child health-related quality of life instruments: A review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 17(6), 895–913. doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9350-5.PubMedCrossRef

Huang, I. C., Shenkman, E. A., Leite, W., Knapp, C. A., Thompson, L. A., & Revicki, D. A. (2009). Agreement was not found in adolescents’ quality of life rated by parents and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(3), 337–346. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.06.012.PubMedCrossRef

Varni, J. W., Limbers, C. A., & Burwinkle, T. M. (2007). Parent proxy-report of their children’s health-related quality of life: An analysis of 13,878 parents’ reliability and validity across age subgroups using the PedsQL 4.0 Generic Core Scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5(1), 2. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-5-2.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Bastiaansen, D., Koot, H. M., Bongers, I. L., Varni, J. W., & Verhulst, F. C. (2004). Measuring quality of life in children referred for psychiatric problems: Psychometric properties of the PedsQLTM 4.0 Generic Core Scales. Quality of Life Research, 13(2), 489–495. doi:10.1023/B:QURE.0000018483.01526.ab.PubMedCrossRef

Cremeens, J., Eiser, C., & Blades, M. (2006). Factors influencing agreement between child self-report and parent proxy-reports on the pediatric quality of life inventory™ 4.0 (PedsQL™) Generic Core Scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4(1), 58.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Huang, I., Shenkman, E. A., Leite, W., Knapp, C. A., Thompson, L. A., & Revicki, D. A. (2009). Agreement was not found in adolescents’ quality of life rated by parents and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(3), 337–346.PubMedCrossRef

Varni, J. W., Burwinkle, T. M., & Lane, M. M. (2005). Health-related quality of life measurement in pediatric clinical practice: An appraisal and precept for future research and application. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3(1), 34. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-3-34.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Eiser, C., & Varni, J. (2013). Health-related quality of life and symptom reporting: Similarities and differences between children and their parents. European Journal of Pediatrics, 172(10), 1299–1304. doi:10.1007/s00431-013-2049-9.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Vetter, T. R., Bridgewater, C. L., & McGwin, G, Jr. (2012). An observational study of patient versus parental perceptions of health-related quality of life in children and adolescents with a chronic pain condition: Who should the clinician believe? Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10(1), 85. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-10-85.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

11.

Jafari, P., Sharafi, Z., Bagheri, Z., & Shalileh, S. (2013). Measurement equivalence of the KINDL questionnaire across child self-reports and parent proxy-reports: A comparison between item response theory and ordinal logistic regression. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 45(3), 369–376.CrossRef

12.

Jafari, P., Bagheri, Z., Hashemi, S. Z., & Shalileh, K. (2014). Assessing whether parents and children perceive the meaning of the items in the PedsQL™ 4.0 quality of life instrument consistently: A differential item functioning analysis. Global Journal of Health Science, 5(5), 80–88. doi:10.1007/s10578-013-0407-5.

13.

Langer, M. M., Hill, C. D., Thissen, D., Burwinkle, T. M., Varni, J. W., & DeWalt, D. A. (2008). Item response theory detected differential item functioning between healthy and ill children in quality-of-life measures. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(3), 268–276. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.05.002.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: Implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 213–232.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Duhig, A. M., Renk, K., Epstein, M. K., & Phares, V. (2000). Interparental agreement on internalizing, externalizing, and total behavior problems: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 7(4), 435–453. doi:10.1093/clipsy.7.4.435.

16.

Petsios, K., Priftis, K. N., Tsoumakas, C., Hatziagorou, E., Tsanakas, J. N., Galanis, P., et al. (2011). Level of parent-asthmatic child agreement on health-related quality of life. Journal of Asthma, 48(3), 286–297. doi:10.3109/02770903.2011.555031.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Gao, W., Paterson, J., Carter, S., Iusitini, L., & Sundborn, G. (2011). Agreement and discordance of parents’ and teachers’ reports of behavioural problems among Pacific children living in New Zealand. Pacific Health Dialog, 17(2), 65–77.PubMed

18.

Sollie, H., Larsson, B., & Morch, W. T. (2013). Comparison of mother, father, and teacher reports of ADHD core symptoms in a sample of child psychiatric outpatients. Journal of Attention Disorders, 17(8), 699–710. doi:10.1177/1087054711436010.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Weitkamp, K., Daniels, J., Rosenthal, S., Romer, G., & Wiegand-Grefe, S. (2013). Health-related quality of life: Cross-informant agreement of father, mother, and self-report for children and adolescents in outpatient psychotherapy treatment. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 18(2), 88–94. doi:10.1111/j.1475-3588.2012.00656.x.CrossRef

20.

Dave, S., Nazareth, I., Senior, R., & Sherr, L. (2008). A comparison of father and mother report of child behaviour on the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 39(4), 399–413. doi:10.1007/s10578-008-0097-6.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Teresi, J. A., & Fleishman, J. A. (2007). Differential item functioning and health assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 33–42. doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9184-6.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, 34, 100–114.

23.

Jafari, P., Forouzandeh, E., Bagheri, Z., Karamizadeh, Z., & Shalileh, K. (2011). Health related quality of life of Iranian children with type 1 diabetes: Reliability and validity of the Persian version of the PedsQL Generic Core Scales and diabetes module. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9(1), 104. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-9-104.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

24.

Jafari, P., Ghanizadeh, A., Akhondzadeh, S., & Mohammadi, M. R. (2011). Health-related quality of life of Iranian children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Quality of Life Research, 20(1), 31–36. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9722-5.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Osterlind, S. J., & Everson, H. T. (2009). Differential item functioning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

26.

Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

27.

Ostini, R., & Nering, M. L. (2006). Polytomous item response theory models . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

28.

DeMars, C. (2010). Item response theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

29.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2013). Item response theory for psychologists. UK: Psychology Press.

30.

Orlando Edelen, M. O., Thissen, D., Teresi, J. A., Kleinman, M., & Ocepek-Welikson, K. (2006). Identification of differential item functioning using item response theory and the likelihood-based model comparison approach. Application to the mini-mental state examination. Medical Care, 44(11), S134–S142. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000245251.83359.8c.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 75(1), 289–300.

32.

Irwin, D., Stucky, B., Langer, M., Thissen, D., DeWitt, E., 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. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9619-3.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

33.

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. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRef

34.

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), S22–S31. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. UK: Psychology Press.

36.

Bartko, J. J. (1966). The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychological Reports, 19(1), 3–11. doi:10.2466/pr0.1966.19.1.3.PubMedCrossRef

37.

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

38.

Christensen, A., Margolin, G., & Sullaway, M. (1992). Interparental agreement on child behavior problems. Psychological Assessment, 4(4), 419–425. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.4.419.CrossRef

39.

Mellor, D., Wong, J., & Xu, X. (2011). Interparent agreement on the strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A Chinese study. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 40(6), 890–896. doi:10.1080/15374416.2011.614580.CrossRef

40.

Oshima, T., & Miller, M. D. (1992). Multidimensionality and item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16(3), 237–248. doi:10.1177/014662169201600304.CrossRef

41.

Teresi, J. A. (2006). Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications: Advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics. Medical Care, 44(11), S152–S170. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000245142.74628.ab.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Mazor, K. M., Hambleton, R. K., & Clauser, B. E. (1998). Multidimensional DIF analyses: The effects of matching on unidimensional subtest scores. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22(4), 357–367. doi:10.1177/014662169802200404.CrossRef

43.

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), S39–S47. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000259879.05499.eb.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Hughes, E. K., & Gullone, E. (2010). Discrepancies between adolescent, mother, and father reports of adolescent internalizing symptom levels and their association with parent symptoms. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 66(9), 978–995. doi:10.1002/jclp.20695.PubMed

45.

Seiffge-Krenke, I., & Kollmar, F. (1998). Discrepancies between mothers’ and fathers’ perceptions of sons’ and daughters’ problem behaviour: A longitudinal analysis of parent-adolescent agreement on internalising and externalising problem behaviour. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39(5), 687–697. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00368.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Testing parent dyad interchangeability in the parent proxy-report of PedsQL™ 4.0: a differential item functioning analysis
Auteurs: Marziyeh Doostfatemeh
Seyyed Mohammad Taghi Ayatollahi
Peyman Jafari
Publicatiedatum: 01-08-2015
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 8/2015
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0931-9

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Result

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 8/2015

Testing item response theory invariance of the standardized Quality-of-life Disease Impact Scale (QDIS®) in acute coronary syndrome patients: differential functioning of items and test

Why do multi-attribute utility instruments produce different utilities: the relative importance of the descriptive systems, scale and ‘micro-utility’ effects

Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment: normative data of the Dutch population

The correlation of the “Walking Estimated-Limitation Calculated by History” (WELCH) questionnaire with treadmill maximal walking time is not impaired by age, in patients with claudication

Validation of the chronic respiratory questionnaire in the Colombian population with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Testing measurement invariance of the GHQ-28 in stroke patients