Literature DB >> 18774693

A simulation study provided sample size guidance for differential item functioning (DIF) studies using short scales.

Neil W Scott1, Peter M Fayers, Neil K Aaronson, Andrew Bottomley, Alexander de Graeff, Mogens Groenvold, Chad Gundy, Michael Koller, Morten A Petersen, Mirjam A G Sprangers.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Differential item functioning (DIF) analyses are increasingly used to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments, which often include relatively short subscales. Computer simulations were used to explore how various factors including scale length affect analysis of DIF by ordinal logistic regression. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: Simulated data, representative of HRQoL scales with four-category items, were generated. The power and type I error rates of the DIF method were then investigated when, respectively, DIF was deliberately introduced and when no DIF was added. The sample size, scale length, floor effects (FEs) and significance level were varied.
RESULTS: When there was no DIF, type I error rates were close to 5%. Detecting moderate uniform DIF in a two-item scale required a sample size of 300 per group for adequate (>80%) power. For longer scales, a sample size of 200 was adequate. Considerably larger sample sizes were required to detect nonuniform DIF, when there were extreme FEs or when a reduced type I error rate was required.
CONCLUSION: The impact of the number of items in the scale was relatively small. Ordinal logistic regression successfully detects DIF for HRQoL instruments with short scales. Sample size guidelines are provided.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18774693     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.06.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  35 in total

1.  Analysis of differential item functioning in the depression item bank from the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS): An item response theory approach.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Katja Ocepek-Welikson; Marjorie Kleinman; Joseph P Eimicke; Paul K Crane; Richard N Jones; Jin-Shei Lai; Seung W Choi; Ron D Hays; Bryce B Reeve; Steven P Reise; Paul A Pilkonis; David Cella
Journal:  Psychol Sci Q       Date:  2009

2.  Interviewer- versus self-administration of PROMIS® measures for adults with traumatic injury.

Authors:  Pamela A Kisala; Aaron J Boulton; Matthew L Cohen; Mary D Slavin; Alan M Jette; Susan Charlifue; Robin Hanks; M J Mulcahey; David Cella; David S Tulsky
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.267

3.  Vegetable parenting practices scale. Item response modeling analyses.

Authors:  Tzu-An Chen; Teresia M O'Connor; Sheryl O Hughes; Alicia Beltran; Janice Baranowski; Cassandra Diep; Tom Baranowski
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 3.868

4.  Comparing cannabis use motive item performance between American Indian and White youth.

Authors:  Samuel R Davis; Mark A Prince; Randall C Swaim; Linda R Stanley
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2020-05-28       Impact factor: 4.492

5.  Assessing meaning & purpose in life: development and validation of an item bank and short forms for the NIH PROMIS®.

Authors:  John M Salsman; Benjamin D Schalet; Crystal L Park; Login George; Michael F Steger; Elizabeth A Hahn; Mallory A Snyder; David Cella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2020-04-19       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Rasch measurement analysis of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI-4) in a community-based rehabilitation sample.

Authors:  Jacob Kean; James F Malec; Irwin M Altman; Shannon Swick
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 5.269

7.  Differential item functioning (DIF) analyses of health-related quality of life instruments using logistic regression.

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

8.  Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox.

Authors:  John M Salsman; Jin-Shei Lai; Hugh C Hendrie; Zeeshan Butt; Nicholas Zill; Paul A Pilkonis; Christopher Peterson; Catherine M Stoney; Pim Brouwers; David Cella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-06-16       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  A cross-cultural study to assess measurement invariance of the KIDSCREEN-27 questionnaire across Serbian and Iranian children and adolescents.

Authors:  Dejan Stevanovic; Peyman Jafari
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-07-18       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Few items in the thyroid-related quality of life instrument ThyPRO exhibited differential item functioning.

Authors:  Torquil Watt; Mogens Groenvold; Laszlo Hegedüs; Steen Joop Bonnema; Åse Krogh Rasmussen; Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen; Jakob Bue Bjorner
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-06-30       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.