Wendy J Coster1, Pengsheng Ni2, Mary D Slavin2, Pamela A Kisala3, Ratna Nandakumar4, Mary Jane Mulcahey5, David S Tulsky3,6, Alan M Jette2. 1. Department of Occupational Therapy, Boston University College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences: Sargent College, Boston, MA, USA. wjcoster@bu.edu. 2. Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA. 4. College of Education and Human Development, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA. 5. Department of Occupational Therapy, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 6. Kessler Foundation Research Center, West Orange, NJ, USA.
Abstract
AIM: The present study examined the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility, Fatigue, and Pain Interference Short Forms (SFs) in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) for the presence of differential item functioning (DIF) relative to the original calibration sample. METHOD: Using the Graded Response Model we compared item parameter estimates generated from a sample of 303 children and adolescents with CP (175 males, 128 females; mean age 15y 5mo) to parameter estimates from the PROMIS calibration sample, which served as the reference group. DIF was assessed in a two-step process using the item response theory-likelihood ratio-differential item functioning detection procedure. RESULTS: Significant DIF was identified for four of eight items in the PROMIS Mobility SF, for two of eight items in the Pain Interference Scale, and for one item out of 10 on the Fatigue Scale. Impact of DIF on total score estimation was notable for Mobility and Pain Interference, but not for Fatigue. INTERPRETATION: Results suggest differences in the responses of adolescents with CP to some items on the PROMIS Mobility and Pain Interference SFs. Cognitive interviews about the PROMIS items with adolescents with varying degrees of mobility limitations would provide better understanding of how they are interpreting and selecting responses to the PROMIS items and thus help guide selection of the most appropriate way to address this issue.
AIM: The present study examined the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility, Fatigue, and Pain Interference Short Forms (SFs) in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) for the presence of differential item functioning (DIF) relative to the original calibration sample. METHOD: Using the Graded Response Model we compared item parameter estimates generated from a sample of 303 children and adolescents with CP (175 males, 128 females; mean age 15y 5mo) to parameter estimates from the PROMIS calibration sample, which served as the reference group. DIF was assessed in a two-step process using the item response theory-likelihood ratio-differential item functioning detection procedure. RESULTS: Significant DIF was identified for four of eight items in the PROMIS Mobility SF, for two of eight items in the Pain Interference Scale, and for one item out of 10 on the Fatigue Scale. Impact of DIF on total score estimation was notable for Mobility and Pain Interference, but not for Fatigue. INTERPRETATION: Results suggest differences in the responses of adolescents with CP to some items on the PROMIS Mobility and Pain Interference SFs. Cognitive interviews about the PROMIS items with adolescents with varying degrees of mobility limitations would provide better understanding of how they are interpreting and selecting responses to the PROMIS items and thus help guide selection of the most appropriate way to address this issue.
Authors: James W Varni; Brian D Stucky; David Thissen; Esi Morgan Dewitt; Debra E Irwin; Jin-Shei Lai; Karin Yeatts; Darren A Dewalt Journal: J Pain Date: 2010-06-02 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Brian D Stucky; David Thissen; James W Varni; Esi Morgan DeWitt; Debra E Irwin; Karin B Yeatts; Darren A DeWalt Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-02-02 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Susan Magasi; Gery Ryan; Dennis Revicki; William Lenderking; Ron D Hays; Meryl Brod; Claire Snyder; Maarten Boers; David Cella Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-08-25 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Anna L Kratz; Mary D Slavin; M J Mulcahey; Alan M Jette; David S Tulsky; Stephen M Haley Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-03-31 Impact factor: 4.147
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: Debra E Irwin; Brian D Stucky; David Thissen; Esi Morgan Dewitt; Jin Shei Lai; Karin Yeatts; James W Varni; Darren A DeWalt Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-03-05 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: Esi Morgan DeWitt; Brian D Stucky; David Thissen; Debra E Irwin; Michelle Langer; James W Varni; Jin-Shei Lai; Karin B Yeatts; Darren A Dewalt Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2011-02-02 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Richard Gershon; Nan E Rothrock; Rachel T Hanrahan; Liz J Jansky; Mark Harniss; William Riley Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-03-21 Impact factor: 4.147