Literature DB >> 26353906

On the validity of measuring change over time in routine clinical assessment: a close examination of item-level response shifts in psychosomatic inpatients.

S Nolte1,2, A Mierke3, H F Fischer3,4, M Rose3,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Significant life events such as severe health status changes or intensive medical treatment often trigger response shifts in individuals that may hamper the comparison of measurements over time. Drawing from the Oort model, this study aims at detecting response shift at the item level in psychosomatic inpatients and evaluating its impact on the validity of comparing repeated measurements. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: Complete pretest and posttest data were available from 1188 patients who had filled out the ICD-10 Symptom Rating (ISR) scale at admission and discharge, on average 24 days after intake. Reconceptualization, reprioritization, and recalibration response shifts were explored applying tests of measurement invariance. In the item-level approach, all model parameters were constrained to be equal between pretest and posttest. If non-invariance was detected, these were linked to the different types of response shift.
RESULTS: When constraining across-occasion model parameters, model fit worsened as indicated by a significant Satorra-Bentler Chi-square difference test suggesting potential presence of response shifts. A close examination revealed presence of two types of response shift, i.e., (non)uniform recalibration and both higher- and lower-level reconceptualization response shifts leading to four model adjustments.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses suggest that psychosomatic inpatients experienced some response shifts during their hospital stay. According to the hierarchy of measurement invariance, however, only one of the detected non-invariances is critical for unbiased mean comparisons over time, which did not have a substantial impact on estimating change. Hence, the use of the ISR can be recommended for outcomes assessment in clinical routine, as change score estimates do not seem hampered by response shift effects.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evaluation; Measurement bias; Measurement invariance; Psychosomatic medicine; Response shift; Routine monitoring

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26353906     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1123-3

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


  28 in total

1.  The Use Of Analysis Of Covariance Structures To Assess Beta And Gamma Change.

Authors:  N Schmitt
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  1982-07-01       Impact factor: 5.923

2.  Structural equation models for quality of life response shifts: promises and pitfalls.

Authors:  Gary W Donaldson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 3.  The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: a meta-analysis of response shift.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Rita Bode; Nicholas Repucci; Janine Becker; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Peter M Fayers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-09-26       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Guidelines for improving the stringency of response shift research using the thentest.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Mirjam A G Sprangers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy.

Authors:  Jonathan Shedler
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  2010 Feb-Mar

6.  Measurement issues in the evaluation of chronic disease self-management programs.

Authors:  Sandra Nolte; Gerald R Elsworth; Stanton Newman; Richard H Osborne
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-11-18       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Understanding appraisal processes underlying the thentest: a mixed methods investigation.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Bruce D Rapkin; Bruce A Rapkin
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Assuring the patient centeredness of patient-reported outcomes: content validity in medical product development and comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Amy P Abernethy; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.725

9.  [Psychological comorbidity. A challenge in acute care].

Authors:  M Rose; I Wahl; J Crusius; B Löwe
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.513

10.  The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: implications for clinical practice and health care policy.

Authors:  Sara Ahmed; Richard A Berzon; Dennis A Revicki; William R Lenderking; Carol M Moinpour; Ethan Basch; Bryce B Reeve; Albert W Wu
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  5 in total

1.  Introduction to special section on response shift at the item level.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  An Analysis of Response Shifts in Teacher Reports Associated with the Use of a Universal School-Based Intervention to Reduce Externalising Behaviour.

Authors:  Aja Louise Murray; Tom Booth; Manuel Eisner; Denis Ribeaud; Karen McKenzie; George Murray
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2019-11

3.  Course of self-reported symptoms of 342 outpatients receiving medium- versus long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy.

Authors:  S Nolte; L Erdur; H F Fischer; M Rose; B Palmowski
Journal:  Biopsychosoc Med       Date:  2016-07-29

4.  Testing for response shift in treatment evaluation of change in self-reported psychopathology amongst secondary psychiatric care outpatients.

Authors:  Ingrid V E Carlier; Wessel A van Eeden; Kim de Jong; Erik J Giltay; Martijn S van Noorden; Christina van der Feltz-Cornelis; Frans G Zitman; Henk Kelderman; Albert M van Hemert
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.035

5.  Re-evaluating randomized clinical trials of psychological interventions: Impact of response shift on the interpretation of trial results.

Authors:  M G E Verdam; W van Ballegooijen; C J M Holtmaat; H Knoop; J Lancee; F J Oort; H Riper; A van Straten; I M Verdonck-de Leeuw; M de Wit; T van der Zweerde; M A G Sprangers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.