Literature DB >> 10982090

Emergence of item response modeling in instrument development and data analysis.

R K Hambleton1.   

Abstract

In summary, readers are encouraged to read carefully the IRT articles in this special issue. They provide theoretical as well as practical arguments in favor of using IRT models in the health outcomes measurement field. At the same time, readers should be aware that the IRT field is complex and software is limited and, in my judgment, not very user friendly (although some packages are better than others). In addition, sample sizes will often need to be larger than in classical measurement, at least with the more general IRT models, and applications are rarely straightforward. Considerable practical experience is needed to ensure successful applications of IRT in the development and validation of instruments for health outcomes measurement.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10982090     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200009002-00009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  30 in total

1.  A new look at the WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument among visually impaired people using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Marmamula Srinivas; Gullapalli N Rao
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Computer-adaptive balance testing improves discrimination between community-dwelling elderly fallers and nonfallers.

Authors:  Poonam K Pardasaney; Pengsheng Ni; Mary D Slavin; Nancy K Latham; Robert C Wagenaar; Jonathan Bean; Alan M Jette
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 3.  Practical and conceptual challenges in measuring antiretroviral adherence.

Authors:  Karina M Berg; Julia H Arnsten
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2006-12-01       Impact factor: 3.731

4.  Reliability and validity of the BASIS-24 Mental Health Survey for Whites, African-Americans, and Latinos.

Authors:  Susan V Eisen; Mariana Gerena; Gayatri Ranganathan; David Esch; Thomas Idiculla
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 1.505

5.  Next steps for use of item response theory in the assessment of health outcomes.

Authors:  Ron D Hays; Joseph Lipscomb
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-03-10       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Improving Communication in Breast Cancer Treatment Consultation: Use of a Computer Test of Health Numeracy.

Authors:  Marilyn M Schapira; Kathlyn E Fletcher; Pamela S Ganschow; Elizabeth A Jacobs; Cindy M Walker; Alicia J Smallwood; Denisse Gil; Arshia Faghri; Amanda L Kong; Tina W Yen; Susan McDunn; Elizabeth Marcus; Joan M Neuner
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-06-25       Impact factor: 2.681

7.  Home fruit, juice, and vegetable pantry management and availability scales: a validation.

Authors:  Tom Baranowski; Mariam Missaghian; Kathy Watson; Alison Broadfoot; Karen Cullen; Theresa Nicklas; Jennifer Fisher; Sharon O'Donnell
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 3.868

8.  The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures.

Authors:  Steven P Reise; Julien Morizot; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Adaptive short forms for outpatient rehabilitation outcome assessment.

Authors:  Alan M Jette; Stephen M Haley; Pengsheng Ni; Richard Moed
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.159

10.  The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study-Neurocognitive Questionnaire (CCSS-NCQ) revised: item response analysis and concurrent validity.

Authors:  Kelly M Kenzik; I-Chan Huang; Tara M Brinkman; Brandon Baughman; Kirsten K Ness; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Melissa M Hudson; Leslie L Robison; Kevin R Krull
Journal:  Neuropsychology       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.