Literature DB >> 23427227

A general theoretical framework for interpreting patient-reported outcomes estimated from ordinally scaled item responses.

Robert W Massof1.   

Abstract

A simple theoretical framework explains patient responses to items in rating scale questionnaires. Fixed latent variables position each patient and each item on the same linear scale. Item responses are governed by a set of fixed category thresholds, one for each ordinal response category. A patient's item responses are magnitude estimates of the difference between the patient variable and the patient's estimate of the item variable, relative to his/her personally defined response category thresholds. Differences between patients in their personal estimates of the item variable and in their personal choices of category thresholds are represented by random variables added to the corresponding fixed variables. Effects of intervention correspond to changes in the patient variable, the patient's response bias, and/or latent item variables for a subset of items. Intervention effects on patients' item responses were simulated by assuming the random variables are normally distributed with a constant scalar covariance matrix. Rasch analysis was used to estimate latent variables from the simulated responses. The simulations demonstrate that changes in the patient variable and changes in response bias produce indistinguishable effects on item responses and manifest as changes only in the estimated patient variable. Changes in a subset of item variables manifest as intervention-specific differential item functioning and as changes in the estimated person variable that equals the average of changes in the item variables. Simulations demonstrate that intervention-specific differential item functioning produces inefficiencies and inaccuracies in computer adaptive testing.
© The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Rasch analysis; differential item functioning; item response theory; low vision; response bias

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23427227     DOI: 10.1177/0962280213476380

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  9 in total

1.  Glaucoma-Associated Visual Task Performance and Vision-Related Quality of Life in South India.

Authors:  Chelsea L Reighard; Manju R Pillai; Sujani Shroff; George L Spaeth; Stephen G Schilling; Sheryl S Wizov; Joshua D Stein; Alan L Robin; Vidya Raja; Joshua R Ehrlich
Journal:  Ophthalmol Glaucoma       Date:  2019-06-18

2.  Empirical Evaluation of Computer-Adaptive Alternate Short Forms for the Assessment of Anomia Severity.

Authors:  William D Hula; Gerasimos Fergadiotis; Alexander M Swiderski; JoAnn P Silkes; Stacey Kellough
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  What Is the Value of Preference Values for Patient-Centered Eye Care?

Authors:  Joshua R Ehrlich
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 7.389

4.  Esomeprazole regimens for reflux symptoms in Chinese patients with chronic gastritis.

Authors:  Jing Sun; Yao-Zong Yuan; Xiao-Hua Hou; Duo-Wu Zou; Bin Lu; Min-Hu Chen; Fei Liu; Kai-Chun Wu; Xiao-Ping Zou; Yan-Qing Li; Li-Ya Zhou
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  Patient-Centered Outcome Measures to Assess Functioning in Randomized Controlled Trials of Low-Vision Rehabilitation: A Review.

Authors:  Joshua R Ehrlich; George L Spaeth; Noelle E Carlozzi; Paul P Lee
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Comparison of clinician-predicted to measured low vision outcomes.

Authors:  Tiffany L Chan; Judith E Goldstein; Robert W Massof
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.973

Review 7.  Patient-Reported Outcomes Research in Neuro-Ophthalmology.

Authors:  Lindsey B De Lott; Joshua R Ehrlich
Journal:  J Neuroophthalmol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.415

8.  Functional Outcomes of the Low Vision Depression Prevention Trial in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Ashley D Deemer; Robert W Massof; Barry W Rovner; Robin J Casten; Catherine V Piersol
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  A quantitative method for measuring the relationship between an objective endpoint and patient reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Chul Ahn; Xin Fang; Phyllis Silverman; Zhiwei Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.