Literature DB >> 28681335

Evaluating measurement invariance across assessment modes of phone interview and computer self-administered survey for the PROMIS measures in a population-based cohort of localized prostate cancer survivors.

Mian Wang1, Ronald C Chen2,3,4, Deborah S Usinger2,3, Bryce B Reeve2,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate measurement invariance (phone interview vs computer self-administered survey) of 15 PROMIS measures responded by a population-based cohort of localized prostate cancer survivors.
METHODS: Participants were part of the North Carolina Prostate Cancer Comparative Effectiveness and Survivorship Study. Out of the 952 men who took the phone interview at 24 months post-treatment, 401 of them also completed the same survey online using a home computer. Unidimensionality of the PROMIS measures was examined using single-factor confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models. Measurement invariance testing was conducted using longitudinal CFA via a model comparison approach. For strongly or partially strongly invariant measures, changes in the latent factors and factor autocorrelations were also estimated and tested.
RESULTS: Six measures (sleep disturbance, sleep-related impairment, diarrhea, illness impact-negative, illness impact-positive, and global satisfaction with sex life) had locally dependent items, and therefore model modifications had to be made on these domains prior to measurement invariance testing. Overall, seven measures achieved strong invariance (all items had equal loadings and thresholds), and four measures achieved partial strong invariance (each measure had one item with unequal loadings and thresholds). Three measures (pain interference, interest in sexual activity, and global satisfaction with sex life) failed to establish configural invariance due to between-mode differences in factor patterns.
CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of phone-based live interviewers in lieu of PC-based assessment (when needed) for many of the PROMIS measures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Measurement invariance; Mode of administration; PROMIS; Prostate cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28681335      PMCID: PMC5656508          DOI: 10.1007/s11136-017-1640-3

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


  14 in total

1.  Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling.

Authors:  Paul D Allison
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  2003-11

2.  Ensuring Positiveness of the Scaled Difference Chi-square Test Statistic.

Authors:  Albert Satorra; Peter M Bentler
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.500

3.  Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).

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

4.  Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance.

Authors:  Adam W Meade; Emily C Johnson; Phillip W Braddy
Journal:  J Appl Psychol       Date:  2008-05

5.  Design of the North Carolina Prostate Cancer Comparative Effectiveness and Survivorship Study (NC ProCESS).

Authors:  Ronald C Chen; William R Carpenter; Mimi Kim; Laura H Hendrix; Robert P Agans; Anne-Marie Meyer; Anna Hoffmeyer; Bryce B Reeve; Matthew E Nielsen; Deborah S Usinger; Tara S Strigo; Anne M Jackman; Mary Anderson; Paul A Godley
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.744

6.  Tests of homoscedasticity, normality, and missing completely at random for incomplete multivariate data.

Authors:  Mortaza Jamshidian; Siavash Jalal
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.500

7.  Reliability and validity of PROMIS measures administered by telephone interview in a longitudinal localized prostate cancer study.

Authors:  Caroleen W Quach; Michelle M Langer; Ronald C Chen; David Thissen; Deborah S Usinger; Marc A Emerson; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-05-30       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008.

Authors:  David Cella; William Riley; Arthur Stone; Nan Rothrock; Bryce Reeve; Susan Yount; Dagmar Amtmann; Rita Bode; Daniel Buysse; Seung Choi; Karon Cook; Robert Devellis; Darren DeWalt; James F Fries; Richard Gershon; Elizabeth A Hahn; Jin-Shei Lai; Paul Pilkonis; Dennis Revicki; Matthias Rose; Kevin Weinfurt; Ron Hays
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative.

Authors:  Jakob B Bjorner; Matthias Rose; Barbara Gandek; Arthur A Stone; Doerte U Junghaenel; John E Ware
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Development and Initial Validation of the PROMIS(®) Sexual Function and Satisfaction Measures Version 2.0.

Authors:  Kevin P Weinfurt; Li Lin; Deborah Watkins Bruner; Jill M Cyranowski; Carrie B Dombeck; Elizabeth A Hahn; Diana D Jeffery; Richard M Luecht; Susan Magasi; Laura S Porter; Jennifer Barsky Reese; Bryce B Reeve; Rebecca A Shelby; Ashley Wilder Smith; John T Willse; Kathryn E Flynn
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 3.802

View more
  6 in total

1.  Psychometric Evaluation of PROMIS Sexual Function and Satisfaction Measures in a Longitudinal Population-Based Cohort of Men With Localized Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Bryce B Reeve; Mian Wang; Kevin Weinfurt; Kathryn E Flynn; Deborah S Usinger; Ronald C Chen
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 3.802

2.  Interviewer- versus self-administration of PROMIS® measures for adults with traumatic injury.

Authors:  Pamela A Kisala; Aaron J Boulton; Matthew L Cohen; Mary D Slavin; Alan M Jette; Susan Charlifue; Robin Hanks; M J Mulcahey; David Cella; David S Tulsky
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 3.  How is quality of life defined and assessed in published research?

Authors:  Daniel S J Costa; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Claudia Rutherford; Margaret-Ann Tait; Madeleine T King
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  A comparison of PHQ-9 and TBI-QOL depression measures among individuals with traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Matthew L Cohen; James A Holdnack; Pamela A Kisala; David S Tulsky
Journal:  Rehabil Psychol       Date:  2018-07-19

5.  Measuring emotional suppression in caregivers of adults with traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Noelle E Carlozzi; Michael A Kallen; Tracey A Brickell; Rael T Lange; Nicholas R Boileau; David Tulsky; Robin A Hanks; Jill P Massengale; Risa Nakase-Richardson; Phillip A Ianni; Jennifer A Miner; Louis M French; Angelle M Sander
Journal:  Rehabil Psychol       Date:  2019-10-03

6.  Distribution of global health measures from routinely collected PROMIS surveys in patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer.

Authors:  Martin G Seneviratne; Selen Bozkurt; Manali I Patel; Tina Seto; James D Brooks; Douglas W Blayney; Allison W Kurian; Tina Hernandez-Boussard
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 6.921

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.