Literature DB >> 17530450

Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment.

Jakob Bue Bjorner1, Chih-Hung Chang, David Thissen, Bryce B Reeve.   

Abstract

Item banks and Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) have the potential to greatly improve the assessment of health outcomes. This review describes the unique features of item banks and CAT and discusses how to develop item banks. In CAT, a computer selects the items from an item bank that are most relevant for and informative about the particular respondent; thus optimizing test relevance and precision. Item response theory (IRT) provides the foundation for selecting the items that are most informative for the particular respondent and for scoring responses on a common metric. The development of an item bank is a multi-stage process that requires a clear definition of the construct to be measured, good items, a careful psychometric analysis of the items, and a clear specification of the final CAT. The psychometric analysis needs to evaluate the assumptions of the IRT model such as unidimensionality and local independence; that the items function the same way in different subgroups of the population; and that there is an adequate fit between the data and the chosen item response models. Also, interpretation guidelines need to be established to help the clinical application of the assessment. Although medical research can draw upon expertise from educational testing in the development of item banks and CAT, the medical field also encounters unique opportunities and challenges.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17530450     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-007-9168-6

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


  19 in total

1.  Practical implications of item response theory and computerized adaptive testing: a brief summary of ongoing studies of widely used headache impact scales.

Authors:  J E Ware; J B Bjorner; M Kosinski
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Explanatory Item Response Models: A Generalized Linear and Nonlinear Approach by P. de Boeck and M. Wilson and Generalized Latent Variable Modeling: Multilevel, Longitudinal and Structural Equation Models by A. Skrondal and S. Rabe-Hesketh.

Authors:  Jay Verkuilen
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.500

3.  Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey.

Authors:  C A McHorney; M Kosinski; J E Ware
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  An item analysis which takes individual differences into account.

Authors:  G Rasch
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  1966-05       Impact factor: 3.380

5.  A study of the feasibility of Internet administration of a computerized health survey: the headache impact test (HIT).

Authors:  M S Bayliss; J E Dewey; I Dunlap; A S Batenhorst; R Cady; M L Diamond; F Sheftell
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Applications of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) to the assessment of headache impact.

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

7.  Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the headache impact test (HIT).

Authors:  Jakob B Bjorner; Mark Kosinski; John E Ware
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Electronic pain questionnaires: a randomized, crossover comparison with paper questionnaires for chronic pain assessment.

Authors:  Andrew J Cook; David A Roberts; Michael D Henderson; Lisa C Van Winkle; Dania C Chastain; Robin J Hamill-Ruth
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 6.961

9.  The potential synergy between cognitive models and modern psychometric models.

Authors:  Jakob B Bjorner; John E Ware; Mark Kosinski
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Performance of a five-item mental health screening test.

Authors:  D M Berwick; J M Murphy; P A Goldman; J E Ware; A J Barsky; M C Weinstein
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  76 in total

1.  A New Stopping Rule for Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Authors:  Seung W Choi; Matthew W Grady; Barbara G Dodd
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 2.821

2.  Development of an item bank and computer adaptive test for role functioning.

Authors:  Milena D Anatchkova; Matthias Rose; John E Ware; Jakob B Bjorner
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Using Qualitative Research to Inform the Development of a Comprehensive Outcomes Assessment for Asthma.

Authors:  Diane M Turner-Bowker; Renee N Saris-Baglama; Michael A Derosa; Christine A Paulsen; Christopher P Bransfield
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  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

5.  Using qualitative research to inform the development of a comprehensive outcomes assessment for asthma.

Authors:  Diane M Turner-Bowker; Renee N Saris-Baglama; Michael A Derosa; Christine A Paulsen; Christopher P Bransfield
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Issues in the design of Internet-based systems for collecting patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  James B Jones; Claire F Snyder; Albert W Wu
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-08-01       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Logistics of collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice: an overview and practical examples.

Authors:  Matthias Rose; Andrea Bezjak
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Claire F Snyder; Joseph M Herman; Sharon M White; Brandon S Luber; Amanda L Blackford; Michael A Carducci; Albert W Wu
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 3.840

9.  Comparison of CAT Item Selection Criteria for Polytomous Items.

Authors:  Seung W Choi; Richard J Swartz
Journal:  Appl Psychol Meas       Date:  2009-09-01

10.  A functional difficulty and functional pain instrument for hip and knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Alan M Jette; Christine M McDonough; Pengsheng Ni; Stephen M Haley; Ronald K Hambleton; Sippy Olarsch; David J Hunter; Young-jo Kim; David T Felson
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 5.156

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.