Literature DB >> 12797710

Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire.

Morten Aa Petersen1, Mogens Groenvold, Jakob B Bjorner, Neil Aaronson, Thierry Conroy, Ann Cull, Peter Fayers, Marianne Hjermstad, Mirjam Sprangers, Marianne Sullivan.   

Abstract

In cross-national comparisons based on questionnaires, accurate translations are necessary to obtain valid results. Differential item functioning (DIF) analysis can be used to test whether translations of items in multi-item scales are equivalent to the original. In data from 10,815 respondents representing 10 European languages we tested for DIF in the nine translations of the EORTC QLQ-C30 emotional function scale when compared to the original English version. We tested for DIF using two different methods in parallel, a contingency table method and logistic regression. The DIF results obtained with the two methods were similar. We found indications of DIF in seven of the nine translations. At least two of the DIF findings seem to reflect linguistic problems in the translation. 'Imperfect' translations can affect conclusions drawn from cross-national comparisons. Given that translations can never be identical to the original we discuss how findings of DIF can be interpreted and discuss the difference between linguistic DIF and DIF caused by confounding, cross-cultural differences, or DIF in other items in the scale. We conclude that testing for DIF is a useful way to validate questionnaire translations.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12797710     DOI: 10.1023/a:1023488915557

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  9 in total

1.  Differential item functioning in the Danish translation of the SF-36.

Authors:  J B Bjorner; S Kreiner; J E Ware; M T Damsgaard; P Bech
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment.

Authors:  M Bullinger; J Alonso; G Apolone; A Leplège; M Sullivan; S Wood-Dauphinee; B Gandek; A Wagner; N Aaronson; P Bech; S Fukuhara; S Kaasa; J E Ware
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Item bias in self-reported functional ability among 75-year-old men and women in three Nordic localities.

Authors:  K Avlund; P Era; M Davidsen; I Gause-Nilsson
Journal:  Scand J Soc Med       Date:  1996-09

4.  Test for item bias in a quality of life questionnaire.

Authors:  M Groenvold; J B Bjorner; M C Klee; S Kreiner
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 5.  Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines.

Authors:  F Guillemin; C Bombardier; D Beaton
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance.

Authors:  Steven P Reise; Keith F Widaman; Robin H Pugh
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  Modern psychometric methods for detection of differential item functioning: application to cognitive assessment measures.

Authors:  J A Teresi; M Kleinman; K Ocepek-Welikson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000 Jun 15-30       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-03-03       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. EORTC Quality of Life Study Group.

Authors:  M A Sprangers; A Cull; M Groenvold; K Bjordal; J Blazeby; N K Aaronson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.147

  9 in total
  50 in total

1.  Occurrences and sources of Differential Item Functioning (DIF) in patient-reported outcome measures: Description of DIF methods, and review of measures of depression, quality of life and general health.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Mildred Ramirez; Jin-Shei Lai; Stephanie Silver
Journal:  Psychol Sci Q       Date:  2008

2.  Does self-efficacy mediate the association between socioeconomic background and emotional symptoms among schoolchildren?

Authors:  Charlotte Meilstrup; Lau Caspar Thygesen; Line Nielsen; Vibeke Koushede; Donna Cross; Bjørn Evald Holstein
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 3.380

3.  Use of item response theory to develop a shortened version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 emotional functioning scale.

Authors:  J B Bjorner; M Aa Petersen; M Groenvold; N Aaronson; M Ahlner-Elmqvist; J I Arraras; A Brédart; P Fayers; M Jordhoy; M Sprangers; M Watson; T Young
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Rapid detection of differential item functioning in assessments of health-related quality of life: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy.

Authors:  Paul K Crane; Laura E Gibbons; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Jin-Shei Lai; David Cella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-11-17       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  The use of differential item functioning analyses to identify cultural differences in responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Authors:  N W Scott; P M Fayers; N K Aaronson; A Bottomley; A de Graeff; M Groenvold; M Koller; M A Petersen; M A G Sprangers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-11-16       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Development of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) for the EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning dimension.

Authors:  Morten Aa Petersen; Mogens Groenvold; Neil K Aaronson; Wei-Chu Chie; Thierry Conroy; Anna Costantini; Peter Fayers; Jorunn Helbostad; Bernhard Holzner; Stein Kaasa; Susanne Singer; Galina Velikova; Teresa Young
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-23       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Assessment of differential item functioning for demographic comparisons in the MOS SF-36 health survey.

Authors:  Anthony J Perkins; Timothy E Stump; Patrick O Monahan; Colleen A McHorney
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Assessing the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey for immigrant and Australian-born cancer patients: a Rasch analysis.

Authors:  J A McGrane; P N Butow; M Sze; M Eisenbruch; D Goldstein; M T King
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-05-24       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Differential item functioning was negligible in an adaptive test of functional status for patients with knee impairments who spoke English or Hebrew.

Authors:  Dennis L Hart; Daniel Deutscher; Paul K Crane; Ying-Chih Wang
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-08-04       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Psychometric assessment of health-related quality of life and symptom experience in HIV patients treated with antiretroviral therapy.

Authors:  Christophe Lalanne; Andrew R Armstrong; Susan Herrmann; Sophie Le Coeur; Patrizia Carrieri; Olivier Chassany; Martin Duracinsky
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.