Zahra Bagheri1, Peyman Jafari2, Marzieh Mahmoodi1, Mohammad Hossein Dabbaghmanesh3. 1. Department of Biostatistics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. jafarip@sums.ac.ir. 3. Endocrine and Metabolism Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract
PURPOSE: It has been rarely studied whether observed disparity in health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) scores between patients with diabetes and healthy individuals is due to differential item functioning (DIF) or a true difference in the underlying construct. This study aimed to examine DIF in the SF-36 questionnaire and its effect on comparing HRQoL scores between patients with diabetes and healthy people. METHODS: The sample consisted of 230 patients with type 2 diabetes and 642 healthy individuals who filled out the Persian version of the SF-36 questionnaire. To detect DIF across patients with diabetes and healthy individuals, multiple-group multiple-indicator multiple-causes model was used. In addition, item calibration strategy was used to determine whether the effect of item-level DIF was transferred to the scale level. RESULTS: Nine out of thirty-six (25 %) items were detected as DIF, of which one item (11 %) was flagged as uniform and eight items (89 %) as non-uniform DIF. Most of the DIF items were detected in the mental health component which includes vitality, perceived mental health and social functioning subscales rather than in physical health component. Moreover, nonsignificant latent mean differences for general health perception and social functioning subscales became significant after DIF calibration. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study show that patients with diabetes and healthy individuals perceived some items in the SF-36 questionnaire differently. More importantly, in some subscales, the effect of item-level DIF was transferred to the scale level. Consequently, considerable caution should be taken in comparing HRQoL scores between patients with diabetes and healthy individuals.
PURPOSE: It has been rarely studied whether observed disparity in health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) scores between patients with diabetes and healthy individuals is due to differential item functioning (DIF) or a true difference in the underlying construct. This study aimed to examine DIF in the SF-36 questionnaire and its effect on comparing HRQoL scores between patients with diabetes and healthy people. METHODS: The sample consisted of 230 patients with type 2 diabetes and 642 healthy individuals who filled out the Persian version of the SF-36 questionnaire. To detect DIF across patients with diabetes and healthy individuals, multiple-group multiple-indicator multiple-causes model was used. In addition, item calibration strategy was used to determine whether the effect of item-level DIF was transferred to the scale level. RESULTS: Nine out of thirty-six (25 %) items were detected as DIF, of which one item (11 %) was flagged as uniform and eight items (89 %) as non-uniform DIF. Most of the DIF items were detected in the mental health component which includes vitality, perceived mental health and social functioning subscales rather than in physical health component. Moreover, nonsignificant latent mean differences for general health perception and social functioning subscales became significant after DIF calibration. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study show that patients with diabetes and healthy individuals perceived some items in the SF-36 questionnaire differently. More importantly, in some subscales, the effect of item-level DIF was transferred to the scale level. Consequently, considerable caution should be taken in comparing HRQoL scores between patients with diabetes and healthy individuals.
Entities:
Keywords:
Differential item functioning; Healthy population; Patients with diabetes; Quality of life; SF-36
Authors: I Bourdel-Marchasson; C Druet; C Helmer; E Eschwege; P Lecomte; M Le-Goff; A J Sinclair; A Fagot-Campagna Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2013-07-05 Impact factor: 5.602
Authors: Annet J Dallmeijer; Vincent de Groot; Leo D Roorda; Vera P M Schepers; Eline Lindeman; Leonard H van den Berg; Anita Beelen; Joost Dekker Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.912
Authors: M Weinberger; M S Kirkman; G P Samsa; P A Cowper; E A Shortliffe; D L Simel; J R Feussner Journal: Med Care Date: 1994-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Eileen R Chasens; Susan M Sereika; Lora E Burke; Patrick J Strollo; Mary Korytkowski Journal: Appl Nurs Res Date: 2014-02-27 Impact factor: 2.257
Authors: I-Chan Huang; Chyng-Chuang Hwang; Ming-Yen Wu; Wender Lin; Walter Leite; Albert W Wu Journal: Value Health Date: 2008 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Alberto J Pérez-Panero; María Ruiz-Muñoz; Raúl Fernández-Torres; Cynthia Formosa; Alfred Gatt; Manuel Gónzalez-Sánchez Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-06-09 Impact factor: 4.147