Development and psychometric evaluation of the flexilevel scale of shoulder function

Medical Care

Volumn 41, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 823-835

  Cook, Karon F ^a,d   Roddey, Toni S ^b   Gartsman, Gary M ^c   Olson, Sharon L ^a  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b TEXAS WOMAN'S UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^d MICHAEL E DEBAKEY VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Outcomes assessment; Psychometrics; Reliability; Shoulder; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; HUMAN; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SHOULDER;

ADULT; HUMANS; MOVEMENT; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SHOULDER;

EID: 0037666900     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200307000-00006     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.
2. Hambleton R, Swaminathan H. Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing; 1985.
3. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating Scale Analysis. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press; 1982.
4. Lord FM. The self-scoring flexilevel test. J Educ Measurement 1971;8:147-151.
5. Lord FM. A theoretical study of the measurement effectiveness of flexilevel tests. J Educ Measurement 1971;31:805-813.
6. Wainer H. Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawence Erlbaum Associates; 1990.
7. Singh J, Howell RD, Rhoads GK. Adaptive designs for Likert-type data: an approach for implementing marketing surveys. J Marketing Res 1990;28:304-321.
8. McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:743-750.
9. Revicki DA, Cella DF. Health status assessment for the twenty-first century: item response theory, item banking and computer adaptive testing. Qual Life Res 1997;6:595-600.
10. Ware JE Jr, Bjorner JB, Kosinski M. Practical implications of item response theory and computerized adaptive testing: a brief summary of ongoing studies of widely used headache impact scales. Med Care 2000;38(Suppl 9):II73-II82.
11. Andrich DA. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 1978;43:561-573.
12. Cook KF, Gartsman GM, Roddey TS, et al. The measurement level and trait-specific reliability of 4 scales of shoulder functioning: an empiric investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:1558-1565.
13. Rasch G. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danmarks Pacdogogiske Institut; 1960.
14. Angoff WH. Scales, Norms, and Equivalent Scores. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service; 1984.
15. Richards RR, Bigliani LU, Gartsman GM, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1994;3:347-352.
16. Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996;34:220-233.
17. Binkley JM, Stratford PW, Lott SA, et al. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): scale develop_ment, measurement properties, and clinical application. North American Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Research Network. Phys Ther 1999;79:371-383.
18. Shrout P, Fleiss J. Intraclass Correlations: Uses in Assessing Rater Reliability. American Psychological Association; 1979:420-428.
19. Guyatt GH, Kirshner B, Jacschke R. Measuring health status: what are the necessary measurement properties? J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:1341-1345.
20. Redelmeier DA, Guyatt GH, Goldstein RS. Assessing the minimal important difference in symptoms: a comparison of two techniques. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:1215-1219.
21. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, et al. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:459-468.
22. Guyatt GH, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:171-178.
23. Deyo RA, Cantor RM. Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 1986;39:897-906.
24. Stucki G, Liang MH, Fossel AH, et al. Relative responsiveness of condition-specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:1369-1378.
25. Wallace D, Duncan PW, Lai SM. Comparison of the responsiveness of the Barthel Index and the motor component of the Functional Independence Measure in stroke the impact of using different methods for measuring responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:922-928.
26. Linacre JM, Wright BD. A User's Guide to BIGSTEPS: Rasch-model Computer Program, Version 2.7. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press; 1997.
27. Cook K, Dodd B, Fitzpatrick S. A comparison of polytomous item response models in the context of testlet scoring. J Outcome Measures 1999;3:1-20.