Rasch Measurement Analysis of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI-4) in a Community-Based Rehabilitation Sample

被引:60
作者
Kean, Jacob [1 ]
Malec, James F. [1 ]
Altman, Irwin M. [2 ]
Swick, Shannon [3 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Dept PM&R, Indianapolis, IN 46254 USA
[2] Gent Rehab Walls, Phoenix, AZ USA
[3] Gent Rehab Walls, Marshall, MI USA
关键词
outcome measures; rehabilitation; TBI; BRAIN-INJURY; VALIDITY; MODEL; DIF;
D O I
10.1089/neu.2010.1573
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
100218 [急诊医学];
摘要
The precise measurement of patient outcomes depends upon clearly articulated constructs and refined clinical assessment instruments that work equally well for all subgroups within a population. This is a challenging task in those with acquired brain injury (ABI) because of the marked heterogeneity of the disorder and subsequent outcomes. Alhough essential, the iterative process of instrument refinement is often neglected. This present study was undertaken to examine validity, reliability, dimensionality and item estimate invariance of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory -4 (MPAI-4), an outcome measure for persons with ABI. The sampled population included 603 persons with traumatic ABI participating in a home-and community-based rehabilitation program. Results indicated that the MPAI-4 is a valid, reliable measure of outcome following traumatic ABI, which measures a broad but unitary core construct of outcome after ABI. Further, the MPAI-4 is composed of items that are unbiased toward selected subgroups except where differences could be expected [ e. g., more chronic traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients are better able to negotiate demands of transportation than more acute TBI patients]. We address the trade-offs between strict unidimensionality and clinical applicability in measuring outcome, and illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of applying single-parameter measurement models to broad constructs.
引用
收藏
页码:745 / 753
页数:9
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]
Baghaei P., 2008, Rasch Measurement Transactions, V22, P1145
[2]
Factor analysis of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory: Structure and validity [J].
Bohac, DL ;
Malec, JF ;
Moessner, AM .
BRAIN INJURY, 1997, 11 (07) :469-482
[3]
Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development [J].
Clark, LA ;
Watson, D .
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 1995, 7 (03) :309-319
[4]
Lezak M.D., 1987, J HEAD TRAUMA REHAB, V2, P57, DOI DOI 10.1097/00001199-198703000-00009
[5]
Linacre J.M., 1994, Rasch Measurement Transactions, V8, P360, DOI DOI 10.1080/00273171.2018.1461058
[6]
Linacre JM, 1994, Rasch Measurement Transactions, V7, P328
[7]
Linacre JM, 2008, WINSTEPS RASCH MODEL
[8]
Malec J., 1994, J HEAD TRAUMA REHAB, V9, P1, DOI [10.1097/00001199-199412000-00003, DOI 10.1097/00001199-199412000-00003]
[9]
Malec J., 2008, Manual for the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI-4) for adults, children, and adolescents
[10]
Comparability of Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory ratings by staff, significant others and people with acquired brain injury [J].
Malec, JF .
BRAIN INJURY, 2004, 18 (06) :563-575