Why Questionnaire Scores Are Not Measures A Question-Raising Article

被引:16
作者
Tesio, Luigi [1 ,2 ,5 ]
Scarano, Stefano [1 ,2 ]
Hassan, Samah [3 ,4 ]
Kumbhare, Dinesh [3 ,4 ]
Caronni, Antonio [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Milan, Dept Biomed Sci Hlth, Milan, Italy
[2] Osped San Luca, Ist Auxol Italiano, Dept Neurorehabil Sci, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Med, Div Phys Med & Rehabil, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Hlth Network, Pain Res Inst, Toronto Rehabil Inst, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Osped SanLuca, Ist AuxologicoItaliano, Dept Neurorehabil Sci, IRCCS, via Giuseppe Mercalli 32, I-20122 Milan, Italy
关键词
Questionnaires; Personmetrics; Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine; Measurement; Rasch Analysis; RASCH; IMPAIRMENT; VALIDITY; STROKE; VIEW;
D O I
10.1097/PHM.0000000000002028
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Any person is provided by characteristics that can be neither located in body parts nor directly observed (so-called latent variables): these may be behaviors, attitudes, perceptions, motor and cognitive skills, knowledge, emotions, and the like. Physical and rehabilitation medicine frequently faces variables of this kind, the target of many interventions. Latent variables can only be observed through representative behaviors (e.g., walking for independence, moaning for pain, social isolation for depression, etc.). To measure them, behaviors are often listed and summated as items in cumulative questionnaires ("scales"). Questionnaires ultimately provide observations ("raw scores") with the aspect of numbers. Unfortunately, they are only a rough and often misleading approximation to true measures for various reasons. Measures should satisfy the same measurement axioms of physical sciences. In the article, the flaws hidden in questionnaires' scores are summarized, and their consequences in outcome assessment are highlighted. The report should inspire a critical attitude in the readers and foster the interest in modern item response theory, with reference to Rasch analysis.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 82
页数:8
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
Agazzi Evandro, 2014, Scientific Objectivity and Its Contexts, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-04660-0
[2]  
Andrich D., 1988, RASCH MODELS MEASURE
[3]   Can manual ability be measured with a generic ABILHAND scale? A cross-sectional study conducted on six diagnostic groups [J].
Arnould, Carlyne ;
Vandervelde, Laure ;
Batcho, Charles Sebiyo ;
Penta, Massimo ;
Thonnard, Jean-Louis .
BMJ OPEN, 2012, 2 (06)
[4]  
Becker K.A., 2003, Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, VFifth
[5]   The concept of validity [J].
Borsboom, D ;
Mellenbergh, GJ ;
van Heerden, J .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2004, 111 (04) :1061-1071
[6]  
Buzzoni M., 2022, ELECTRONS ELEPHANTS, P743
[7]  
Carlson J.E., 2017, Advancing human assessment, P133, DOI [DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-58689-2_5, 10.1007/978-3-319-58689-2_5, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-58689-25]
[8]   ASSESSING MOTOR IMPAIRMENT AFTER STROKE - A PILOT RELIABILITY STUDY [J].
COLLIN, C ;
WADE, D .
JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY, 1990, 53 (07) :576-579
[9]   Psychometric properties of the Rivermead Mobility Index in Italian stroke rehabilitation inpatients [J].
Franchignoni, F ;
Tesio, L ;
Benevolo, E ;
Ottonello, M .
CLINICAL REHABILITATION, 2003, 17 (03) :273-282
[10]   A further Rasch study confirms that ALSFRS-R does not conform to fundamental measurement requirements [J].
Franchignoni, Franco ;
Mandrioli, Jessica ;
Giordano, Andrea ;
Ferro, Salvatore .
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration, 2015, 16 (5-6) :331-337