OBJECTIVE: To compare the measurement properties of the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire [MHAQ], the SF-36((R)) Health Survey 10 item Physical Functioning scale [PF10], and scores from an item response theory (IRT) based scale combining the two measures. STUDY DESIGN:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients (n = 339) enrolled in a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial completed the MHAQ and the SF-36 pre- and post-treatment. Psychometric analyses used confirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Analyses of variance were used to assess sensitivity to changes in disease severity (defined by the American College of Rheumatism (ACR)) using change scores in MHAQ, PF10, and IRT scales. Analyses of covariance were used to assess treatment responsiveness. RESULTS: For the entire score range, the 95% confidence interval around individual patient scores was smaller for the combined (total) IRT based scale than for other measures. The MHAQ and PF10 were about 70% and 50% as efficient as the total IRT score of physical functioning in discriminating among ACR groups, respectively. The MHAQ and PF10 were also less efficient than the total IRT score in discriminating among treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combining scales from the two short forms yields a more powerful tool with greater sensitivity to treatment response.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the measurement properties of the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire [MHAQ], the SF-36((R)) Health Survey 10 item Physical Functioning scale [PF10], and scores from an item response theory (IRT) based scale combining the two measures. STUDY DESIGN:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients (n = 339) enrolled in a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial completed the MHAQ and the SF-36 pre- and post-treatment. Psychometric analyses used confirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Analyses of variance were used to assess sensitivity to changes in disease severity (defined by the American College of Rheumatism (ACR)) using change scores in MHAQ, PF10, and IRT scales. Analyses of covariance were used to assess treatment responsiveness. RESULTS: For the entire score range, the 95% confidence interval around individual patient scores was smaller for the combined (total) IRT based scale than for other measures. The MHAQ and PF10 were about 70% and 50% as efficient as the total IRT score of physical functioning in discriminating among ACR groups, respectively. The MHAQ and PF10 were also less efficient than the total IRT score in discriminating among treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combining scales from the two short forms yields a more powerful tool with greater sensitivity to treatment response.
Authors: John E Ware; Mark Kosinski; Jakob B Bjorner; Martha S Bayliss; Alice Batenhorst; Carl G H Dahlöf; Stewart Tepper; Andrew Dowson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Claire E H Barber; JoAnn Zell; Jinoos Yazdany; Aileen M Davis; Laura Cappelli; Linda Ehrlich-Jones; Donna Everix; J Carter Thorne; Victoria Bohm; Lisa Suter; Alex Limanni; Kaleb Michaud Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: I-Chan Huang; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Pey-Shan Wen; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Dennis A Revicki; Kevin Krull; Zhushan Li; Patricia D Shearer Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-11-20 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: I-Chan Huang; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Kevin Krull; Katie Z Eddleton; Devin C Murphy; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Patricia D Shearer Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-11-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Beth E Snitz; Lan Yu; Paul K Crane; Chung-Chou H Chang; Tiffany F Hughes; Mary Ganguli Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2012 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Matthias Rose; Jakob B Bjorner; Barbara Gandek; Bonnie Bruce; James F Fries; John E Ware Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Martijn Ah Oude Voshaar; Peter M Ten Klooster; Erik Taal; Eswar Krishnan; Mart Afj van de Laar Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2012-03-05 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Pablo Rebollo; Ignacio Castejón; Jesús Cuervo; Guillermo Villa; Eduardo García-Cueto; Helena Díaz-Cuervo; Pilar C Zardaín; José Muñiz; Jordi Alonso Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Julio Cabrero-García; Juan Diego Ramos-Pichardo; Carmen Luz Muñoz-Mendoza; María José Cabañero-Martínez; Lorena González-Llopis; Abilio Reig-Ferrer Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2012-12-05 Impact factor: 3.186