Michiel A J Luijten1,2, Raphaële R L van Litsenburg3,4, Caroline B Terwee2, Martha A Grootenhuis3, Lotte Haverman5. 1. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Postbus 22660, 1100 AD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Cancer Center Amsterdam, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Postbus 22660, 1100 AD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. l.haverman@amsterdamumc.nl.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to validate the PROMIS Pediatric item bank v2.0 Peer Relationships and compare reliability of the full item bank to its short form, computerized adaptive test (CAT) and the social functioning (SF) subscale of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL™). METHODS: Children aged 8-18 (n = 1327), representative of the Dutch population completed the Peer Relationships item bank. A graded response model (GRM) was fit to the data. Structural validity was assessed by checking item-fit statistics (S-X2, p < 0.001 = misfit). For construct validity, a moderately strong correlation (> 0.50) was expected between Peer Relationships and the PedsQL SF subscale. Cross-cultural DIF between U.S. and NL was assessed using logistic regression, where an item with McFadden's pseudo R2 > 0.02 was considered to have DIF. Percentage of participants reliably measured was assessed using the standard error of measurement (SEM) < 0.32 as a criterion (reliability of 0.90). Relative efficiency ((1-SEM2)/nitems) was calculated to compare how well the instruments performed relative to the amount of items administered. RESULTS: In total, 527 (response rate: 39.7%) children completed the PROMIS v2.0 Peer Relationships item bank (nitems = 15) and the PedsQL™ (nitems = 23). Structural validity of the Peer Relationships item bank was sufficient, but one item displayed misfit in the GRM model (S-X2 < 0.001); 5152R1r ("I played alone and kept to myself"). The item 733R1r ("I was a good friend") was the only item that displayed cross-cultural DIF (R2 = 0.0253). The item bank correlated moderately high (r = 0.61) with the PedsQL SF subscale Reliable measurements were obtained at the population mean and > 2SD in the clinically relevant direction. CAT outperformed all other measures in efficiency. Mean T-score of the Dutch general population was 46.9(SD 9.5). CONCLUSION: The pediatric PROMIS Peer Relationships item bank was successfully validated for use within the Dutch population and reference data are now available.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to validate the PROMIS Pediatric item bank v2.0 Peer Relationships and compare reliability of the full item bank to its short form, computerized adaptive test (CAT) and the social functioning (SF) subscale of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL™). METHODS:Children aged 8-18 (n = 1327), representative of the Dutch population completed the Peer Relationships item bank. A graded response model (GRM) was fit to the data. Structural validity was assessed by checking item-fit statistics (S-X2, p < 0.001 = misfit). For construct validity, a moderately strong correlation (> 0.50) was expected between Peer Relationships and the PedsQL SF subscale. Cross-cultural DIF between U.S. and NL was assessed using logistic regression, where an item with McFadden's pseudo R2 > 0.02 was considered to have DIF. Percentage of participants reliably measured was assessed using the standard error of measurement (SEM) < 0.32 as a criterion (reliability of 0.90). Relative efficiency ((1-SEM2)/nitems) was calculated to compare how well the instruments performed relative to the amount of items administered. RESULTS: In total, 527 (response rate: 39.7%) children completed the PROMIS v2.0 Peer Relationships item bank (nitems = 15) and the PedsQL™ (nitems = 23). Structural validity of the Peer Relationships item bank was sufficient, but one item displayed misfit in the GRM model (S-X2 < 0.001); 5152R1r ("I played alone and kept to myself"). The item 733R1r ("I was a good friend") was the only item that displayed cross-cultural DIF (R2 = 0.0253). The item bank correlated moderately high (r = 0.61) with the PedsQL SF subscale Reliable measurements were obtained at the population mean and > 2SD in the clinically relevant direction. CAT outperformed all other measures in efficiency. Mean T-score of the Dutch general population was 46.9(SD 9.5). CONCLUSION: The pediatric PROMIS Peer Relationships item bank was successfully validated for use within the Dutch population and reference data are now available.
Entities:
Keywords:
Computerized adaptive testing; Health-related quality of life; Psychometrics; Reliability; Social functioning; Validity
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
Authors: Daniel J Buysse; Lan Yu; Douglas E Moul; Anne Germain; Angela Stover; Nathan E Dodds; Kelly L Johnston; Melissa A Shablesky-Cade; Paul A Pilkonis Journal: Sleep Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: David Cella; Susan Yount; Nan Rothrock; Richard Gershon; Karon Cook; Bryce Reeve; Deborah Ader; James F Fries; Bonnie Bruce; Mattias Rose Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: John Øvretveit; Lisa Zubkoff; Eugene C Nelson; Susan Frampton; Janne Lehmann Knudsen; Eyal Zimlichman Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: James F Fries; James Witter; Matthias Rose; David Cella; Dinesh Khanna; Esi Morgan-DeWitt Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Lotte Haverman; Martha A Grootenhuis; Hein Raat; Marion A J van Rossum; Eline van Dulmen-den Broeder; Karel Hoppenbrouwers; Helena Correia; David Cella; Leo D Roorda; Caroline B Terwee Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-03-28 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Dane J Brodke; Chong Zhang; Jeremy D Shaw; Amy M Cizik; Charles L Saltzman; Darrel S Brodke Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: Karen Fischer; Jacintha M Tieskens; Tinca J C Polderman; Arne Popma; Michiel A J Luijten; Josjan Zijlmans; Hedy A van Oers; Rowdy de Groot; Daniël van der Doelen; Hanneke van Ewijk; Helen Klip; Rikkert M van der Lans; Ronald De Meyer; Malindi van der Mheen; Maud M van Muilekom; I Hyun Ruisch; Lorynn Teela; Germie van den Berg; Hilgo Bruining; Rachel van der Rijken; Jan Buitelaar; Pieter J Hoekstra; Ramón Lindauer; Kim J Oostrom; Wouter Staal; Robert Vermeiren; Ronald Cornet; Lotte Haverman; Meike Bartels Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 5.349
Authors: Michiel A J Luijten; Maud M van Muilekom; Lorynn Teela; Tinca J C Polderman; Caroline B Terwee; Josjan Zijlmans; Leonie Klaufus; Arne Popma; Kim J Oostrom; Hedy A van Oers; Lotte Haverman Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-05-15 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Michiel A J Luijten; Lotte Haverman; Raphaële R L van Litsenburg; Leo D Roorda; Martha A Grootenhuis; Caroline B Terwee Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 3.860
Authors: Josjan Zijlmans; Lorynn Teela; Hanneke van Ewijk; Helen Klip; Malindi van der Mheen; Hyun Ruisch; Michiel A J Luijten; Maud M van Muilekom; Kim J Oostrom; Jan Buitelaar; Pieter J Hoekstra; Ramón Lindauer; Arne Popma; Wouter Staal; Robert Vermeiren; Hedy A van Oers; Lotte Haverman; Tinca J C Polderman Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Maud M van Muilekom; Lorynn Teela; Hedy A van Oers; Johannes B van Goudoever; Martha A Grootenhuis; Lotte Haverman Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 4.147