Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10): II. Comparison of relative precision using Likert and Rasch scoring methods

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 451-461

  McHorney, Colleen A ^a,b   Haley, Stephen M ^c   Ware Jr , John E ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b WILLIAM S MIDDLETON MEMORIAL VETERANS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c New England Rehabilitation Hospital   (United States)

^d TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Health status assessment; Item response theory; Measurement precision; Physical functioning; Rasch rating scale analysis

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; VARIANCE;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HEART FAILURE, CONGESTIVE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; PSYCHOMETRICS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 0030918054     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00424-6     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Wright JG, Feinstein AR. A comparative contrast of clinometric and psychometric methods for constructing indexes and rating scales. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 1201-1218.
2. Stewart AL, Ware JE, Eds. Measuring Functioning and Well-Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 1992.
3. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473-483.
4. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 1932; 140: 5-55.
5. McHorney C, Ware JE, Lu JFR, et al. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care 1994; 32: 40-66.
6. Brook RH, Ware JE, Davies-Avery A, et al. Overview of adult health status measures fielded in RAND's Health Insurance Study. Med Care 1979; 17(Suppl.): 1-131.
7. Parkerson GR, Gehlbach SH, Wagner EH, et al. The Duke-UNC Health Profile: An adult health status instrument for primary care. Med Care 1981; 19: 806-828.
8. Jette AM, Davies AR, Cleary PD, et al. The Functional Status Questionnaire: Reliability and validity when used in primary care. J Gen Intern Med 1986; 1: 143-149.
9. Chambers LW. The McMaster Health Index Questionnaire: An update. In: Walker SR, Rosser RM, eds. Quality of Life: Assessment and Application. Lancaster: MTP Press Limited; 1988: pp. 113-131.
10. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE. The MOS Short-Form General Health Survey: Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1988; 26: 724-735.
11. Parkerson GR, Broadhead WE, Tse CJ. The Duke Health Profile: A 17-item measure of health and dysfunction. Med Care 1990; 28: 1056-1072.
12. Merbitz C, Morris J, Grip JC. Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1989; 70: 308-312.
13. Fisher WP. Measurement-related problems in functional assessment. Am J Occup Ther 1993; 47: 331-338.
14. Silverstein B, Kilgore KM, Fisher WP, et al. Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation: I. Exploring unidimensionality. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1991; 72: 631-637.
15. Silverstein B, Fisher WP, Kilgore KM, et al. Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation: II. Defining interval measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73: 507-518.
16. Wright BD, Stone MH. Best Test Design. Chicago: MESA Press; 1979.
17. Andrich D. Rasch Models for Measurement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1988.
18. Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ. Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1991.
19. Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.; 1978.
20. Hambleton RK. Principles and selected applications of item response theory. In: Linn LR, Ed. Educational Measurement (3rd ed). New York: Macmillan; 1989: pp. 147-200.
21. Haley SM, McHorney CA, Ware JE. Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale: I. Unidimensionality and reproducibility of the Rasch scale. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 671-684.
22. Stucki G, Daltroy L, Katz JN, et al. Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures: The whole may not equal the sum of the parts. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 711-717.
23. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating Scale Analysis. Chicago: MESA Press; 1982.
24. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Rogers W, et al. The validity and relative precision of MOS short- and long-form health status scales and Dartmouth COOP charts: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care 1992; 30(Suppl.): MS253-MS265.
25. Kirshner B, Guyatt GH. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chron Dis 1985; 38: 27-36.
26. Guyatt GH, Kirshner B, Jaeschke R. Measuring health status: What are the necessary properties? J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 1341-1345.
27. Guyatt GH, Kirshner B, Jaeschke R. A methodologic framework for health status measures: Clarity or oversimplification? J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 1353-1355.
28. Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 622-629.
29. Guyatt GH. A taxonomy of health status instruments. J Rheumatol 1995; 22: 1188-1190.
30. Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R, Fenny DH, et al. Measurements in clinical trials: Choosing the right approach. In: Spilker B, Ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996 pp. 41-48.
31. Stewart AL, Greenfield S, Hays RD, et al. Functional status and well-being of patients with chronic conditions: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA 1989; 262: 907-913.
32. Tarlov AR, Ware JE, Greenfield S, et al. The Medical Outcomes Study: An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA 1989; 262: 925-930.
33. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247-263.
34. Wright BD, Linacre JM. A User's Guide to BIGSTEPS: Rasch-Model Computer Program. Chicago: MESA Press; 1992.
35. Efron B, Tibshirani R. Bootstrap methods for standard errors, confidence intervals, and other measures of statistical accuracy. Stat Sci 1986; 1:54-77.
36. Efron B, Tibshirani R. Statistical data analysis in the computer age. Science (Wash DC) 1991; 253: 390-395.
37. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: Assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chron Dis 1987; 40: 171-178.
38. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Control Clin Trials 1991; 12: 142S-158S.
39. Grimby G, Gudonsson G, Rodhe M, et al. The Functional Independence Measure in Sweden: Experience for outcome measurement in rehabilitation medicine. Scand J Rehab Med 1996; 28: 51-62.
40. Cleary PD. Future directions of quality of life research. In: Spilker B, Ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996 pp. 73-78.
41. McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and future challenges in monitoring health care delivery and clinical practice. Paper presented at the Sixth Biennial Regenstrief Conference, Measuring Quality, Outcomes, and Costs of Care Using Large Databases, September 4-6, 1996, Indianapolis, IN.
42. Masters GN. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrica 1982; 47: 149-174
43. McArther DL, Cohen MJ, Schandler SL. Rasch analysis of functional assessment scales: An example using pain behavior. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1991; 72: 296-304.
44. Fisher AG. The assessment of IADL motor skills: An application of many-faceted Rasch analysis. Am J Occup Ther 1993; 47: 319-329.
45. Teresi JA, Golden RR, Cross P, et al. Item bias in cognitive screening measures: Comparisons of elderly white, Afro-American, Hispanic and high and low education subgroups. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 473-483.
46. Cella DF, Dineen K, Arnason B, et al. Validation of the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis quality of life instrument. Neurology 1996; 47: 129-139.
47. Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, et al. The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: Conceptualization and development. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 151-161.
48. Tennant A, Hillman M, Fear J, et al. Are we making the most of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire? Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35: 574-578.
49. Von Koff M, Ustun TB, Ormel J, et al. Self-report disability in an international primary care study of psychological illness. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 297-303.
50. Jones PD, Grayson DA, Moran PA. The utility of latent trait models in psychiatric epidemiology. Psychol Med 1986; 16: 391-405.
51. Wolfe F, Pincus T. Standard self-report questionnaires in routine clinical and research practice - an opportunity for patients and rheumatologists. J Rheumatol 1991; 18: 643-646.
52. Calkins DR, Rubenstein LV, Cleary PD, et al. Functional disability screening of ambulatory patients. J Gen Intern Med 1994; 9: 590-592.
53. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 1995; 4: 293-308.
54. Rubenstein LV, McCoy MJ, Cope DW, et al. Improving patient quality of life with feedback to physicians about functional status. J Gen Intern Med 1995; 10: 607-614.
55. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, et al. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.