An Introduction to Item Response Theory for Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement

被引:0
作者
Tam H. Nguyen
Hae-Ra Han
Miyong T. Kim
Kitty S. Chan
机构
[1] Boston College,School of Nursing
[2] Connell School of Nursing,School of Nursing
[3] Johns Hopkins University,Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health
[4] The University of Texas at Austin,undefined
[5] Johns Hopkins University,undefined
来源
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | 2014年 / 7卷
关键词
Differential Item Functioning; Item Response Theory; Item Parameter; Item Bank; Item Response Theory Model;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The growing emphasis on patient-centered care has accelerated the demand for high-quality data from patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Traditionally, the development and validation of these measures has been guided by classical test theory. However, item response theory (IRT), an alternate measurement framework, offers promise for addressing practical measurement problems found in health-related research that have been difficult to solve through classical methods. This paper introduces foundational concepts in IRT, as well as commonly used models and their assumptions. Existing data on a combined sample (n = 636) of Korean American and Vietnamese American adults who responded to the High Blood Pressure Health Literacy Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 are used to exemplify typical applications of IRT. These examples illustrate how IRT can be used to improve the development, refinement, and evaluation of PRO measures. Greater use of methods based on this framework can increase the accuracy and efficiency with which PROs are measured.
引用
收藏
页码:23 / 35
页数:12
相关论文
共 96 条
[1]  
Brook RH(1979)Overview of adult health measures fielded in Rand’s health insurance study Med Care 17 1-131
[2]  
Ware JE(2004)Measuring treatment impact: a review of patient-reported outcomes and other efficacy endpoints in approved product labels Control Clin Trials 25 535-552
[3]  
Davies-Avery A(2013)The patient-centered outcomes research institute: a 2013 agenda for “research done differently” Popul Health Manag 16 69-70
[4]  
Stewart AL(2010)FDA guidance on patient reported outcomes BMJ 340 c2921-II65
[5]  
Donald CA(2000)Emergence of item response modeling in instrument development and data analysis Med Care 38 II60-349
[6]  
Rogers WH(1996)The new rules of measurement Psychol Assess 8 341-548
[7]  
Willke RJ(1953)The relation of test score to the trait underlying the test Educ Psychol Meas 13 517-415
[8]  
Burke LB(1969)Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores Psychom Monogr 34 386-573
[9]  
Erickson P(1978)A rating formulation for ordered response categories Psychometrika 43 561-174
[10]  
Selby JV(1982)A Rasch model for partial credit scoring Psychometrika 47 149-176