Literature DB >> 7930122

Likert or Rasch? Nothing is more applicable than good theory.

A van Alphen1, R Halfens, A Hasman, T Imbos.   

Abstract

In nursing research many concepts are measured by questionnaires. Respondents are asked to respond to a set of related statements or questions. In unidimensional scaling these statements or questions are indicants of the same concept. Scaling means to assign numbers to respondents, according to their position on the continuum underlying the concept. It is very common to use the summative Likert scaling procedure. The sumscore of the responses to the items is the estimator of the position of the patient on the continuum. The rationale behind this procedure is classical test theory. The main assumption in this theory is that all items are parallel instruments. The Rasch model offers an alternative scaling procedure. With Rasch both respondents and items are scaled on the same continuum. Whereas in Likert scaling all items have the same weight in the summating procedure, in the Rasch model items are differentiated from each other by 'difficulty'. The model holds that the probability of a positive response to an item is dependent on the difference between the difficulty of the item and the value of the person on the latent trait. The rationale behind this procedure is item response theory. In this paper both scaling procedures and their rationales are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7930122     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20010196.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adv Nurs        ISSN: 0309-2402            Impact factor:   3.187


  24 in total

1.  A comparison of Rasch with Likert scoring to discriminate between patients' evaluations of total hip replacement surgery.

Authors:  R Fitzpatrick; J M Norquist; C Jenkinson; B C Reeves; R W Morris; D W Murray; P J Gregg
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Developing an item bank to measure the coping strategies of people with hereditary retinal diseases.

Authors:  Mallika Prem Senthil; Jyoti Khadka; John De Roach; Tina Lamey; Terri McLaren; Isabella Campbell; Eva K Fenwick; Ecosse L Lamoureux; Konrad Pesudovs
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Validation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-57 and -29 item short forms among kidney transplant recipients.

Authors:  Evan Tang; Oladapo Ekundayo; John Devin Peipert; Nathaniel Edwards; Aarushi Bansal; Candice Richardson; Susan J Bartlett; Doris Howell; Madeline Li; David Cella; Marta Novak; Istvan Mucsi
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  The impact of the severity of vision loss on vision-specific functioning in a German outpatient population - an observational study.

Authors:  Robert P Finger; Eva Fenwick; Peggy Pei-Chia Chiang; Michael Petrak; Frank G Holz; Manjula Marella; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a Rasch analysis of the SWAN Rating Scale.

Authors:  Deidra J Young; Florence Levy; Neilson C Martin; David A Hay
Journal:  Child Psychiatry Hum Dev       Date:  2009-05-20

6.  Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): efficient, standardized tools to measure self-reported health and quality of life.

Authors:  Margaret Bevans; Alyson Ross; David Cella
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2014-06-12       Impact factor: 3.250

7.  Evaluation of item candidates for a diabetic retinopathy quality of life item bank.

Authors:  Eva K Fenwick; Konrad Pesudovs; Jyoti Khadka; Gwyn Rees; Tien Y Wong; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Validation of the Glaucoma Quality of Life-15 Questionnaire in Serbian language.

Authors:  Ivan Sencanic; Tatjana Gazibara; Jelena Dotlic; Miroslav Stamenkovic; Vesna Jaksic; Marija Bozic; Anita Grgurevic
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

9.  Development of a Documentation Rubric and Assessment of Pharmacists' Competency for Documentation in the Patient Health Record.

Authors:  Brittany Baranski; Jennifer Bolt; Lori Albers; Rabiah Siddiqui; Ali Bell; William Semchuk
Journal:  Can J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2017-12-21

10.  What are the minimal sample size requirements for Mokken scaling? An empirical example with the Warwick- Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale.

Authors:  Roger Watson; Iris J L Egberink; Lisa Kirke; Jorge N Tendeiro; Frank Doyle
Journal:  Health Psychol Behav Med       Date:  2018-08-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.