OBJECTIVE: To use item response theory (IRT) methods to link physical functioning items in the Activity Measure for Post Acute Care (AM-PAC) and the Quality of Life Outcomes in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QOL). DESIGN: Secondary data analysis of the physical functioning items of AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL. We used a nonequivalent group design with 36 core items common to both instruments and a test characteristic curve transformation method for linking AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL scores. Linking was conducted so that both raw and scaled AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL scores (mean ± SD converted-logit scores, 50 ± 10) could be compared. SETTING: AM-PAC items were administered to rehabilitation patients in post-acute care (PAC) settings. Neuro-QOL items were administered to a community sample of adults through the Internet. PARTICIPANTS: PAC patients (N=1041) for the AM-PAC sample and community-dwelling adults (N=549) for the Neuro-QOL sample. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility (N=25) and activity of daily living (ADL) items (N=11) common to both instruments were included in analysis. RESULTS: Neuro-QOL items were linked to the AM-PAC scale by using the generalized partial credit model. Mobility and ADL subscale scores from the 2 instruments were calibrated to the AM-PAC metric. CONCLUSIONS: An IRT-based linking method placed AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL mobility and ADL scores on a common metric. This linking allowed estimation of AM-PAC mobility and ADL subscale scores based on Neuro-QOL mobility and ADL subscale scores and vice versa. The accuracy of these results should be validated in a future sample in which participants respond to both instruments.
OBJECTIVE: To use item response theory (IRT) methods to link physical functioning items in the Activity Measure for Post Acute Care (AM-PAC) and the Quality of Life Outcomes in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QOL). DESIGN: Secondary data analysis of the physical functioning items of AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL. We used a nonequivalent group design with 36 core items common to both instruments and a test characteristic curve transformation method for linking AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL scores. Linking was conducted so that both raw and scaled AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL scores (mean ± SD converted-logit scores, 50 ± 10) could be compared. SETTING:AM-PAC items were administered to rehabilitation patients in post-acute care (PAC) settings. Neuro-QOL items were administered to a community sample of adults through the Internet. PARTICIPANTS: PAC patients (N=1041) for the AM-PAC sample and community-dwelling adults (N=549) for the Neuro-QOL sample. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility (N=25) and activity of daily living (ADL) items (N=11) common to both instruments were included in analysis. RESULTS: Neuro-QOL items were linked to the AM-PAC scale by using the generalized partial credit model. Mobility and ADL subscale scores from the 2 instruments were calibrated to the AM-PAC metric. CONCLUSIONS: An IRT-based linking method placed AM-PAC and Neuro-QOL mobility and ADL scores on a common metric. This linking allowed estimation of AM-PAC mobility and ADL subscale scores based on Neuro-QOL mobility and ADL subscale scores and vice versa. The accuracy of these results should be validated in a future sample in which participants respond to both instruments.
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; Ron D Hays; Jakob B Bjorner; Karon F Cook; Paul K Crane; Jeanne A Teresi; David Thissen; Dennis A Revicki; David J Weiss; Ronald K Hambleton; Honghu Liu; Richard Gershon; Steven P Reise; Jin-shei Lai; David Cella Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Wendy J Coster; Stephen M Haley; Patricia L Andres; Larry H Ludlow; Tamara L Y Bond; Peng-Sheng Ni Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: David S Tulsky; Alan M Jette; Pamela A Kisala; Claire Kalpakjian; Marcel P Dijkers; Gale Whiteneck; Pengsheng Ni; Steven Kirshblum; Susan Charlifue; Allen W Heinemann; Martin Forchheimer; Mary D Slavin; Bethlyn Houlihan; Denise G Tate; Trevor Dyson-Hudson; Denise G Fyffe; Steve Williams; Jeanne Zanca Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2012-05-16 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; David Thissen; Darren A DeWalt; I-Chan Huang; Yang Liu; Brooke Magnus; Hally Quinn; Heather E Gross; Pamela A Kisala; Pengsheng Ni; Stephen Haley; M J Mulcahey; Susie Charlifue; Robin A Hanks; Mary Slavin; Alan Jette; David S Tulsky Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Mary J Mulcahey; Stephen M Haley; Mary D Slavin; Pamela A Kisala; Pengsheng Ni; David S Tulsky; Alan M Jette Journal: J Pediatr Orthop Date: 2016 Oct-Nov Impact factor: 2.324
Authors: Axel Budde; Katja Baust; Leonie Weinhold; Mark Bernstein; Stefan Bielack; Catharina Dhooge; Lars Hjorth; Katherine A Janeway; Meriel Jenney; Mark D Krailo; Neyssa Marina; Rajaram Nagarajan; Sigbjørn Smeland; Matthew R Sydes; Patricia De Vos; Jeremy Whelan; Andreas Wiener; Gabriele Calaminus; Matthias Schmid Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 10.002
Authors: Craig M McDonald; Erik K Henricson; R Ted Abresch; Jay J Han; Diana M Escolar; Julaine M Florence; Tina Duong; Adrienne Arrieta; Paula R Clemens; Eric P Hoffman; Avital Cnaan Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2013-05-16 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: Peter M ten Klooster; Martijn A H Oude Voshaar; Barbara Gandek; Matthias Rose; Jakob B Bjorner; Erik Taal; Cees A W Glas; Piet L C M van Riel; Mart A F J van de Laar Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 3.186