Top

Quality of Life Research

Published in:

07-06-2018

Procedures to develop a computerized adaptive test to assess patient-reported physical functioning

Authors: Erin McCabe, Douglas P. Gross, Okan Bulut

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 9/2018

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the procedures to develop and implement a computerized adaptive patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure using secondary analysis of a dataset and items from fixed-format legacy measures.

Methods

We conducted secondary analysis of a dataset of responses from 1429 persons with work-related lower extremity impairment. We calibrated three measures of physical functioning on the same metric, based on item response theory (IRT). We evaluated efficiency and measurement precision of various computerized adaptive test (CAT) designs using computer simulations.

Results

IRT and confirmatory factor analyses support combining the items from the three scales for a CAT item bank of 31 items. The item parameters for IRT were calculated using the generalized partial credit model. CAT simulations show that reducing the test length from the full 31 items to a maximum test length of 8 items, or 20 items is possible without a significant loss of information (95, 99% correlation with legacy measure scores).

Conclusions

We demonstrated feasibility and efficiency of using CAT for PRO measurement of physical functioning. The procedures we outlined are straightforward, and can be applied to other PRO measures. Additionally, we have included all the information necessary to implement the CAT of physical functioning in the electronic supplementary material of this paper.

previous article Utility elicitation in adults and children for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and associated health states

next article Grooming a CAT: customizing CAT administration rules to increase response efficiency in specific research and clinical settings

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

More information about the study participant characteristics and the conditions under which data were collected is available in the original study publication [11].

Canadian Institute for Health Information. (2009). PROMs background document.

Valderas, J. M., Kotzeva, A., Espallargues, M., Guyatt, G., Ferrans, C. E., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2008). The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: A systematic review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 17(2), 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9295-0.CrossRefPubMed

Jette, A. M., & Haley, S. M. (2005). Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37(6), 339–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/16501970500302793.CrossRefPubMed

Revicki, D. A., & Cella, D. F. (1997). Health status assessment for the twenty-first century: Item response theory, item banking and computer adaptive testing. Quality of Life Research, 6(6), 595–600. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018420418455.CrossRefPubMed

Weiss, D. (2011). Better data from better measurements using computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social, 2(1), 1–23.

Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1179–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Walker, J., Bohnke, J. R., Cerny, T., & Strasser, F. (2010). Development of symptom assessments utilising item response theory and computer-adaptive testing-A practical method based on a systematic review. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology, 73(1), 47–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2009.03.007.CrossRefPubMed

Flens, G., Smits, N., Carlier, I., van Hemert, A. M., & de Beurs, E. (2016). Simulating computer adaptive testing with the mood and anxiety symptom questionnaire. Psychological Assessment, 28(8), 953–962. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000240.CrossRefPubMed

Smits, N., Zitman, F. G., Cuijpers, P., Den Hollander-Gijsman, M. E., & Carlier, I. V. (2012). A proof of principle for using adaptive testing in routine outcome monitoring: The efficiency of the mood and anxiety symptoms questionnaire—anhedonic depression CAT. BMC Medical Research Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

10.

Thompson, N. A., & Weiss, D. J. (2011). A framework for the development of computerized adaptive tests. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 16(1), 1–9.

11.

Gross, D. P., Zhang, J., Steenstra, I., Barnsley, S., Haws, C., Amell, T., et al. (2013). Development of a computer-based clinical decision support tool for selecting appropriate rehabilitation interventions for injured workers. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 23(4), 597–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-013-9430-4.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Finch, E., Brooks, D., Stratford, P. W., & Mayo, N. (2002). Physical rehabilitation outcome measures: A guide to enhanced clinical decision making (2nd edn.). Toronto: Canadian Physiotherapy Association.

13.

McHorney, C., Ware, J. E., & Raczek, A. E. (1993). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Medical Care, 31(3), 247–263. https://doi.org/10.2307/3765819.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Binkley, J. M., Stratford, P. W., Lott, S. A., & Riddle, D. L. (1999). The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): Scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. Physical Therapy, 79(4), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198903001-00007.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Gibbons, L. E., Feldman, B. J., Crane, H. M., Mugavero, M., Willig, J. H., Patrick, D., Schumacher, J., Saag, M., Kitahata, M. M., & Crane, P. K. (2011). Migrating from a legacy fixed-format measure to CAT administration: calibrating the PHQ-9 to the PROMIS depression measures. Quality of Life Research, 20(9), 1349–1357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9882-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Riddle, D. L., & Stratford, P. W. (2013). Is this change real? Interpreting patient outcomes in physical therapy. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Co. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=550421.

17.

World Health Organization. (2002). Towards a common language for functioning, disability and health ICF. International classification. WHO/EIP/GPE/CAS/01.3.

18.

Smits, N., Paap, M. C. S., & Böhnke, J. R. (2018). Some recommendations for developing multidimensional computerized adaptive tests for patient-reported outcomes. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1821-8.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

19.

McDowell, I. (2006). Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (3rd edn.). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

20.

Syddall, H. E., Martin, H. J., Harwood, R. H., Cooper, C., & Sayer, A., A (2009). The SF-36: A simple, effective measure of mobility-disability for epidemiological studies. The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging, 13(1), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-009-0010-4.CrossRef

21.

Mehta, S. P., Fulton, A., Quach, C., Thistle, M., Toledo, C., & Evans, N. A. (2016). Measurement properties of the lower extremity functional scale: A systematic review. The Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 46(3), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2016.6165.CrossRefPubMed

22.

R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.

23.

de Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York: Guilford Press. Retrieved from https://www.library.ualberta.ca/catalog/4469201.

24.

Baker, F. (2001). The basics of item response theory. ERIC clearinghouse on assessment and evaluation. University of MD. Retrieved April 21, 2018, from http://echo.edres.org:8080/irt/baker/.

25.

Chalmers, R. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06. doi.CrossRef

26.

Chalmers, R. P. (2016). Generating adaptive and non-adaptive test interfaces for multidimensional item response theory applications. Journal of Statistical Software, 71(5), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v071.i05. doi.CrossRef

27.

The University of Cambridge Psychometrics Centre. (n.d.). Concerto. Open-source online adaptive testing platform. Retrieved from http://concertoplatform.com/.

28.

Hart, D. L., Mioduskib, J. E., Wernekec, M. W., & Stratford, P. W. (2006). Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59, 947–956.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Haley, S. M., Coster, W. J., Andres, P. L., Kosinski, M., & Ni, P. (2004). Score comparability of short forms and computerized adaptive testing: Simulation study with the activity measure for post-acute care. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85(4), 661–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.097.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Jette, A. M., McDonough, C. M., Haley, S. M., Ni, P., Olarsch, S., Latham, N., et al. (2009). A computer-adaptive disability instrument for lower extremity osteoarthritis research demonstrated promising breadth, precision, and reliability. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(8), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

McDonough, C. M., Ni, P., Peterik, K., Marfeo, E. E., Marino, M. E., Meterko, M., et al. (2017). Improving measures of work-related physical functioning. Quality of Life Research, 26(3), 789–798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1477-1.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Anatchkova, M., Rose, M., Ware, J., & Bjorner, J. B. (2013). Evaluation of a role functioning computer adaptive test (RF-CAT). Quality of Life Research, 22(5), 1085–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0215-6.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Hart, D. L., Wang, Y.-C., Stratford, P. W., & Mioduski, J. E. (2008). Computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments produced valid and responsive measures of function. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(4), 1113–1124.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Procedures to develop a computerized adaptive test to assess patient-reported physical functioning
Authors: Erin McCabe
Douglas P. Gross
Okan Bulut
Publication date: 07-06-2018
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 9/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1898-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 9/2018

Anxiety in the orthopedic patient: using PROMIS to assess mental health

Validity of the EQ–5D–5L and reference norms for the Spanish population

Utility elicitation in adults and children for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and associated health states

WHO disability assessment schedule 2.0 is related to upper and lower extremity disease-specific quality of life

Combining online and in-person methods to evaluate the content validity of PROMIS fatigue short forms in rheumatoid arthritis

Does anthropometric and fitness parameters mediate the effect of exercise on the HRQoL of overweight and obese children/adolescents?

Premium Partner