Leonie Klaufus1,2, Xiaodan Tang3, Eva Verlinden4, Marcel van der Wal4, Lotte Haverman5, Michiel Luijten5,6, Pim Cuijpers7, Mai Chinapaw8, Benjamin Schalet3. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Health Promotion, and Health Care Innovation, Public Health Service Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 100, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Lklaufus@ggd.amsterdam.nl. 2. Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Lklaufus@ggd.amsterdam.nl. 3. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 625 N Michigan Ave, 22nd floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Health Promotion, and Health Care Innovation, Public Health Service Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 100, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to link scores of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale short version (RCADS-25) to the metric of the PROMIS pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in a general Dutch population sample. METHODS: The RCADS-25 and PROMIS pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms were administered online to 2,893 Dutch children and adolescents aged 8-18. Assumptions for linking methods were checked. Linking was achieved by using three item response theory (IRT) and two equipercentile methods. For each method, the observed PROMIS metric scores were compared to the ones predicted from the RCADS-25 subscale scores using correlations, mean and SD of differences, and RMSD. RESULTS: The assumptions for IRT-based and equipercentile linking were met. The IRT-based method using separate calibration with Stocking-Lord constants was considered the optimal choice for linking both RCADS-25 subscales to the PROMIS metric. Based on this Stocking-Lord approach, we created item parameters for RCADS-25 items and two crosswalk tables. CONCLUSION: The RCADS-25 item parameters and crosswalk tables presented in this study are sufficiently valid. Researchers can use these products to translate the RCADS-25 anxiety and depression subscales scores to the PROMIS metric in order to ensure comparability with the previous research.
PURPOSE: This study aims to link scores of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale short version (RCADS-25) to the metric of the PROMIS pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in a general Dutch population sample. METHODS: The RCADS-25 and PROMIS pediatric item banks Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms were administered online to 2,893 Dutch children and adolescents aged 8-18. Assumptions for linking methods were checked. Linking was achieved by using three item response theory (IRT) and two equipercentile methods. For each method, the observed PROMIS metric scores were compared to the ones predicted from the RCADS-25 subscale scores using correlations, mean and SD of differences, and RMSD. RESULTS: The assumptions for IRT-based and equipercentile linking were met. The IRT-based method using separate calibration with Stocking-Lord constants was considered the optimal choice for linking both RCADS-25 subscales to the PROMIS metric. Based on this Stocking-Lord approach, we created item parameters for RCADS-25 items and two crosswalk tables. CONCLUSION: The RCADS-25 item parameters and crosswalk tables presented in this study are sufficiently valid. Researchers can use these products to translate the RCADS-25 anxiety and depression subscales scores to the PROMIS metric in order to ensure comparability with the previous research.
Authors: Benjamin D Schalet; Nan E Rothrock; Ron D Hays; Lewis E Kazis; Karon F Cook; Joshua P Rutsohn; David Cella Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Debra E Irwin; Brian Stucky; Michelle M Langer; David Thissen; Esi Morgan Dewitt; Jin-Shei Lai; James W Varni; Karin Yeatts; Darren A DeWalt Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-03-07 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Karolin R Krause; Sophie Chung; Abiodun O Adewuya; Anne Marie Albano; Rochelle Babins-Wagner; Laura Birkinshaw; Peter Brann; Cathy Creswell; Kathleen Delaney; Bruno Falissard; Christopher B Forrest; Jennifer L Hudson; Shin-Ichi Ishikawa; Meghna Khatwani; Christian Kieling; Judi Krause; Kanika Malik; Vania Martínez; Faraz Mughal; Thomas H Ollendick; Say How Ong; George C Patton; Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer; Peter Szatmari; Evie Thomas; Lucas Walters; Bryan Young; Yue Zhao; Miranda Wolpert Journal: Lancet Psychiatry Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 27.083
Authors: Chad Ebesutani; Steven P Reise; Bruce F Chorpita; Chelsea Ale; Jennifer Regan; John Young; Charmaine Higa-McMillan; John R Weisz Journal: Psychol Assess Date: 2012-02-13
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: 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