Issues in the development of an item bank

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Volumn 84, Issue 4 SUPPL. 2, 2003, Pages

  Bode, Rita K ^a,b   Lai, Jin Shei ^b,c   Cella, David ^b,c   Heinemann, Allen W ^a,b  

^a REHABILITATION INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c EVANSTON NORTHWESTERN HEALTHCARE   (United States)

Author keywords

Quality of life; Rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

CANCER CENTER; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS; MEASUREMENT; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; STROKE;

EID: 0345269797     PISSN: 00039993     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1053/apmr.2003.50247     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Segal ME, Heinemann AW, Schall RR, Wright BD. Rasch analysis of a brief physical ability scale for long-term outcomes of stroke. In: Smith RM, editor. Physical medicine and rehabilitation: state of the arts reviews: outcome measurement. Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus; 1997. p 385-96.
2. Doninger N, Bode RK, Heinemann AW, Ambrose C. Rating scale analysis of the Neurobehavioral Cognitive Screening Exam (NCSE). J Head Trauma Rehabil 2000;15:683-95.
3. Fisher WP Jr. Physical disability construct convergence across instruments: towards a universal metric. J Outcome Meas 1997; 1(2):87-113.
4. Cella DF, Lloyd SR, Wright BD. Cross-cultural instrument equating: current research and future directions. In: Spilker D, editor, Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2d ed. New York: Lippincott-Raven; 1996. p 707-15.
5. Fisher WP Jr, Harvey RF, Taylor P, Kilgore KM, Kelly CK. Rehabits: a common language of functional assessment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995;76:113-21.
6. Fisher WP Jr, Eubanks RL, Marier RL, Hunter SM. Equating the LSU HSI and the SF-36 using a probabilistic measurement model. Measurement Research Reports. New Orleans (LA): LSU Medical Center, Dept Preventive Medicine and Public Health; 1996.
7. Chang CH, Cella D. Equating health-related quality of life instruments in applied oncology settings. In: Smith RM, editor. Physical medicine and rehabilitation: state of the arts reviews: outcome measurement. Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus; 1997. p 397-406.
8. Leplege A, Ecosse E. Methodological issues in using the Rasch model to select cross culturally equivalent items in order to develop a quality of life index: the analysis of four WHOQOL-100 data sets (Argentina, France, Hong Kong, United Kingdom). J Appl Meas 2000;1:372-93.
9. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I: Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992:30:473-83.
10. Stewart AL, Napoles-Springer A. Health-related quality of life assessments in diverse population groups in the United States. Med Care 2000;38(9 Suppl):II102-24.
11. Sherbourne CD, Meredith LS. Quality of self-report data: a comparison of older and younger chronically ill patients, J Gerontol 1992;47:S204-11.
12. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Lu JF, Sherbourne CD. 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.
13. Meredith LS, Siu AL. Variation and quality of self-report health data: Asians and Pacific Islanders compared with other ethnic groups. Med Care 1995;33:1120-31.
14. Johnson PA, Goldman L, Orav EJ, Garcia T, Pearson SD, Lee TH. Comparison of the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey in black patients and white patients with acute chest pain. Med Care 1995;33:145-60.
15. Wolinsky FD, Stump TE. A measurement model of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey in a clinical sample of disadvantaged, older, black, and white men and women. Med Care 1996;34:537-48.
16. Arocho R, McMillan CA. Discriminant and criterion validation of the US-Spanish version of the SF-36 Health Survey in a Cuban-American population with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Med Care 1998;36:766-72.
17. Wolfe EW. Understanding Rasch measurement: equating and item banking with the Rasch model. J Appl Meas 2000;1:409-34.
18. Bode RK. Understanding Rasch measurement: partial credit model and pivot anchoring. J Appl Meas 2001;2(1):78-95.
19. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Bonomi A, Lee-Riordan D, Silberman M, Purl S. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scales: incorporating disease-specificity and subjectivity into quality of life (QL) assessment [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1990;9:307.
20. Whitelaw NA, Liang J. The structure of the OARS physical health measures. Med Care 1991;29:332-47.
21. Liang J, Bennett J, Whitelaw N, Maeda D. The structure of self-reported physical health among the aged in the United States and Japan. Med Care 1991;29:1161-80.
22. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Rev ed. Chicago: Mesa Pr; 1980.
23. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Chicago: Mesa Pr; 1982.
24. Hambleton RK. Principles and selected applications of item response theory. In: Linn RL, editor. Educational measurement. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1989. p 147-200.
25. Wright BD. Comparing Rasch measurement and factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling 1996;3(1):3-24.
26. Smith RM. A comparison of methods for determining dimensionality in Rasch measurement. Structural Equation Modeling 1996; 3(1):25-40.
27. Linacre JM. Structure in Rasch residuals: why principal components analysis? Rasch Meas Trans 1998;12:636.
28. Rogler LH. Methodological sources of cultural insensitivity in mental health research. Am Psychol 1999;54:424-33.
29. Choppin B. An item bank using sample-free calibration. Nature 1968;219:870-2.
30. Millman J, Arter JA. Issues in item banking. J Educ Meas 1984; 21:315-30.
31. Wright BD, Bell SR. Item banks: what, why, how. J Educ Meas 1984;21:331-45.
32. Bergstrom B. Diagnosing noisy anchors. Rasch Meas Trans 1993; 3:327.
33. Wright BD, Schulz EM. MFORMS [a FORTRAN computer program for one-step item banking of dichotomous and partial credit data from multiple forms]. Chicago: Mesa Pr; 1987.
34. Linacre JM. WINSTEPS computer program. Chicago: Mesa Pr; 2001.
35. Schulz M. One-step item banking computer program. Rasch Meas Trans 1987;1:10.
36. Smith RM. Applications of Rasch measurement. Chicago: Mesa Pr; 1992.
37. Angoff WH. Scales, norming, and equivalent scores. In: Thorndike RL, editor. Educational measurement. 2nd ed. Washington (DC): American Council on Education; 1971. p 508-600.
38. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:365-76.
39. Fayers P, Aaronson N, Bjordal K, Curran D, Groenvold M. EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual. 2nd ed. Brussels: European Organizational Fund for Research and Treatment of Cancer; 1999.
40. Cella D. Manual of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system. Evanston (IL): Center on Outcomes, Research and Education (CORE), Evanston Northwestern Healthcare and Northwestern University; 1997.
41. Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. User's manual for the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS): core measures of health-related quality of life. Santa Monica (CA): RAND; 1995.
42. Schag CA, Ganz P, Heinrich RL. Cancer rehabilitation evaluation system-short form: a cancer specific rehabilitation and quality of life instrument. Cancer 1991;68:1406-13.
43. Cleeland CS. Assessment of pain in cancer: measurement issues. In: Foley KM, editor. Advances in pain research and therapy. Vol 16. New York: Raven Pr; 1990. p 47-55.
44. McCorkle R, Jepson C, Malone D, et al. The impact of posthospital home care on patients with cancer. Res Nurs Health 1994;17:243-51.
45. Tait RC, Pollard CA, Margolis RB, Duckro PN, Krause SJ. The Pain Disability Index: psychometric and validity data. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987;68:438-41.