Literature DB >> 17440260

Evidence-based practice for equating health status items: sample size and IRT model.

Karon F Cook1, Patrick W Taylor, Barbara G Dodd, Cayla R Teal, Colleen A McHorney.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the development of health outcome measures, the pool of candidate items may be divided into multiple forms, thus "spreading" response burden over two or more study samples. Item responses collected using this approach result in two or more forms whose scores are not equivalent. Therefore, the item responses must be equated (adjusted) to a common mathematical metric.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of sample size, test size, and selection of item response theory model in equating three forms of a health status measure. Each of the forms was comprised of a set of items unique to it and a set of anchor items common across forms. RESEARCH
DESIGN: The study was a secondary data analysis of patients' responses to the developmental item pool for the Health of Seniors Survey. A completely crossed design was used with 25 replications per study cell.
RESULTS: We found that the quality of equatings was affected greatly by sample size. Its effect was far more substantial than choice of IRT model. Little or no advantage was observed for equatings based on 60 or 72 items versus those based on 48 items.
CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that samples of less than 300 are clearly unacceptable for equating multiple forms. Additional sample size guidelines are offered based on our results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17440260

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Meas        ISSN: 1529-7713


  4 in total

1.  Linking the activity measure for post acute care and the quality of life outcomes in neurological disorders.

Authors:  Stephen M Haley; Pengsheng Ni; Jin-Shei Lai; Feng Tian; Wendy J Coster; Alan M Jette; Donald Straub; David Cella
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.966

2.  Power(ful) myths: misconceptions regarding sample size in quality of life research.

Authors:  Samantha F Anderson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 3.440

3.  Linking pain items from two studies onto a common scale using item response theory.

Authors:  Wen-Hung Chen; Dennis A Revicki; Jin-Shei Lai; Karon F Cook; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2009-07-03       Impact factor: 3.612

4.  Linking Existing Instruments to Develop an Activity of Daily Living Item Bank.

Authors:  Chih-Ying Li; Sergio Romero; Heather S Bonilha; Kit N Simpson; Annie N Simpson; Ickpyo Hong; Craig A Velozo
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 2.651

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.