PURPOSE: To investigate whether the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) can serve as a generic instrument for measuring disability across different rheumatic diseases and to propose a scoring method based on item response theory (IRT) modeling to support this goal. METHODS: The HAQ-DI was administered to a cross-sectional sample of patients with confirmed rheumatoid arthritis (n = 619), osteoarthritis (n = 125), or gout (n = 102). The results were analyzed using the generalized partial credit model as an IRT model. RESULTS: It was found that 4 out of 8 item categories of the HAQ-DI displayed substantial differential item functioning (DIF) over the three diseases. Further, it was shown that this DIF could be modeled using an IRT model with disease-specific item parameters, which produces measures that are comparable for the three diseases. CONCLUSION: Although the HAQ-DI partially functioned differently in the three disease groups, the measurement regarding the disability level of the patients can be made comparable using IRT methods.
PURPOSE: To investigate whether the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) can serve as a generic instrument for measuring disability across different rheumatic diseases and to propose a scoring method based on item response theory (IRT) modeling to support this goal. METHODS: The HAQ-DI was administered to a cross-sectional sample of patients with confirmed rheumatoid arthritis (n = 619), osteoarthritis (n = 125), or gout (n = 102). The results were analyzed using the generalized partial credit model as an IRT model. RESULTS: It was found that 4 out of 8 item categories of the HAQ-DI displayed substantial differential item functioning (DIF) over the three diseases. Further, it was shown that this DIF could be modeled using an IRT model with disease-specific item parameters, which produces measures that are comparable for the three diseases. CONCLUSION: Although the HAQ-DI partially functioned differently in the three disease groups, the measurement regarding the disability level of the patients can be made comparable using IRT methods.
Authors: Jason C Cole; Dinesh Khanna; Philip J Clements; James R Seibold; Donald P Tashkin; Harold E Paulus; Michael R Irwin; Sarosh J Motivala; Daniel E Furst Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-07-07 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jasvinder A Singh; Will J Taylor; Lee S Simon; Puja P Khanna; Lisa K Stamp; Fiona M McQueen; Tuhina Neogi; Angelo L Gaffo; Michael A Becker; Patricia A MacDonald; Omar Dabbous; Vibeke Strand; Nicola D Dalbeth; Daniel Aletaha; N Lawrence Edwards; H Ralph Schumacher Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Martijn B A van der Wal; Wim E Tuinebreijer; Åsa Lundgren-Nilsson; Esther Middelkoop; Paul P M van Zuijlen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-02-09 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Polly Niravath; Susan G Hilsenbeck; Tao Wang; Sao Jiralerspong; Julie Nangia; Anne Pavlick; Foluso Ademuyiwa; Ashley Frith; Cynthia Ma; Haeseong Park; Caron Rigden; Rama Suresh; Matthew Ellis; C Kent Osborne; Mothaffar F Rimawi Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Nienke Cuperus; Thea P M Vliet Vlieland; Elien A M Mahler; Clarinda C Kersten; Thomas J Hoogeboom; Cornelia H M van den Ende Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2014-10-10 Impact factor: 2.631