Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function

被引:85
作者
Hart, Dennis L.
Mioduski, Jerome E.
Werneke, Mark W.
Stratford, Paul W.
机构
[1] Focus Therapeut Outcomes Inc, White Stone, VA 22578 USA
[2] Focus Therapeut Outcomes Inc, Knoxville, TN USA
[3] Spine Rehabil Ctr State Med Ctr, Freehold, NJ USA
[4] McMaster Univ, Sch Rehabil Sci, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada
[5] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada
关键词
item response theory; back pain functional scale; rehabilitation; true-score equating; computerized adaptive testing; lumbar spine;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.017
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To equate physical functioning (PF) items with Back Pain Functional Scale (BPFS) items, develop a computerized adaptive test (CAT) designed to assess lumbar spine functional status (LFS) in people with lumbar spine impairments, and compare discriminant validity of LFS measures (theta(IRT)) generated using all items analyzed with a rating scale Item Response Theory model (RSM) and measures generated using the simulated CAT (O-CAT). Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of retrospective intake rehabilitation data. Results: Unidimensionality and local independence of 25 BPFS and PF items were supported. Differential item functioning was negligible for levels of symptom acuity, gender, age, and surgical history. The RSM fit the data well. A lumbar spine specific CAT was developed that was 72% more efficient than using all 25 items to estimate LFS measures. theta(IRT) and theta(CAT) measures did not discriminate patients by symptom acuity, age, or gender, but discriminated patients by surgical history in similar clinically logical ways. theta(CAT) measures were as precise as theta(IRT) measures. Conclusion: A body part specific simulated CAT developed from an LFS item bank was efficient and produced precise measures of LFS without eroding discriminant validity. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:947 / 956
页数:10
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]  
Andersen ErlingB., 1997, HDB MODERN ITEM RESP, P67, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-1-4757-2691-6_4
[2]   RATING FORMULATION FOR ORDERED RESPONSE CATEGORIES [J].
ANDRICH, D .
PSYCHOMETRIKA, 1978, 43 (04) :561-573
[3]  
[Anonymous], J REHABIL OUTCOMES M
[4]   The feasibility of applying item response theory to measures of migraine impact: A re-analysis of three clinical studies [J].
Bjorner, JB ;
Kosinski, M ;
Ware, JE .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2003, 12 (08) :887-902
[5]  
Bode Rita K, 2003, J Appl Meas, V4, P124
[6]   Issues in the development of an item bank [J].
Bode, RK ;
Lai, JS ;
Cella, D ;
Heinemann, AW .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2003, 84 (04) :S52-S60
[7]  
Bond T. G., 2007, APPL RASCH MODEL
[8]  
Browne M., 1993, TESTING STRUCTURAL E, P136, DOI [DOI 10.1177/0049124192021002005, 10.1177/0049124192021002005]
[9]   PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE USE OF CONVENTIONAL AND ITEM RESPONSE THEORY EQUATING METHODS IN LESS THAN OPTIMAL CIRCUMSTANCES [J].
COOK, LL ;
PETERSEN, NS .
APPLIED PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1987, 11 (03) :225-244
[10]   Test bias in a cognitive test: differential item functioning in the CASI [J].
Crane, PK ;
van Belle, G ;
Larson, EB .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2004, 23 (02) :241-256