OBJECTIVE: Measures of shoulder function may differ by dominance of affected shoulder, surgical history, gender, or race. We present a technique for determining whether observed differences in function between groups are due to biased test items or real differences in function. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Four hundred patients who were receiving rehabilitation for a variety of shoulder impairments completed a survey of shoulder function. Thirty-seven items measuring shoulder function were analyzed for differential item functioning (DIF) related to demographic characteristics using an ordinal logistic regression (OLR) and item response theory (IRT) approach. When DIF was identified in an item, we modified the IRT analysis to calibrate item parameters separately in appropriate demographic groups. We compared adjusted and unadjusted patient ability measures in each demographic group. RESULTS: Several items were found to have a modest amount of DIF related to the different demographic characteristics, especially gender; however, adjusting measures for DIF had little impact on overall measures of shoulder function and made almost no difference in average shoulder function across demographic groups. CONCLUSION: In this pool of shoulder function items, adjustment for DIF made almost no difference in measures of function across demographic groups.
OBJECTIVE: Measures of shoulder function may differ by dominance of affected shoulder, surgical history, gender, or race. We present a technique for determining whether observed differences in function between groups are due to biased test items or real differences in function. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Four hundred patients who were receiving rehabilitation for a variety of shoulder impairments completed a survey of shoulder function. Thirty-seven items measuring shoulder function were analyzed for differential item functioning (DIF) related to demographic characteristics using an ordinal logistic regression (OLR) and item response theory (IRT) approach. When DIF was identified in an item, we modified the IRT analysis to calibrate item parameters separately in appropriate demographic groups. We compared adjusted and unadjusted patient ability measures in each demographic group. RESULTS: Several items were found to have a modest amount of DIF related to the different demographic characteristics, especially gender; however, adjusting measures for DIF had little impact on overall measures of shoulder function and made almost no difference in average shoulder function across demographic groups. CONCLUSION: In this pool of shoulder function items, adjustment for DIF made almost no difference in measures of function across demographic groups.
Authors: Paul K Crane; Laura E Gibbons; Katja Ocepek-Welikson; Karon Cook; David Cella; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Ron D Hays; Jeanne A Teresi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-06-07 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Paul K Crane; Karynsa Cetin; Karon F Cook; Kurt Johnson; Richard Deyo; Dagmar Amtmann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-04-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Stephane Robitail; Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer; Marie-Claude Simeoni; Luis Rajmil; Jeanet Bruil; Mick Power; Wolfgang Duer; Bernhard Cloetta; Ladislav Czemy; Joanna Mazur; Agnes Czimbalmos; Yannis Tountas; Curt Hagquist; Jean Kilroe; Pascal Auquier Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Paul K Crane; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Laura E Gibbons; Dan M Mungas; Sebastien Haneuse; Eric B Larson; Lewis Kuller; Kathleen Hall; Gerald van Belle Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2008-05-05 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Neil W Scott; Peter M Fayers; Neil K Aaronson; Andrew Bottomley; Alexander de Graeff; Mogens Groenvold; Chad Gundy; Michael Koller; Morten A Petersen; Mirjam A G Sprangers Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2010-08-04 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Paul K Crane; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Laura E Gibbons; Otto Pedraza; Kala M Mehta; Yuxiao Tang; Jennifer J Manly; Bruce R Reed; Dan M Mungas Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 2.892