Methodological aspects of differential item functioning in the Rasch model

Journal of Medical Economics

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 309-324

  Brodersen, John ^a   Meads, David ^b   Kreiner, Svend ^a   Thorsen, Hanne ^a   Doward, Lynda ^b   McKenna, Stephen ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b GALEN RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Item bias; Rasch analysis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CENTER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES DEPRESSION SCALE; COST CONTROL; DEPRESSION; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOSOCIAL CARE; RASCH ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 34748913675     PISSN: 13696998     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3111/13696990701557048     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Wright BD. Fundamental measurement for psychology. In: Embretson SE, Hershberger SL, editors. The New Rules of Measurement: What Every Psychologist and Educator Should Know. Mahwah, New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999; 65-104.
2. Andrich D. Controversy and the Rasch model: a characteristic of incompatible paradigms? Medical Care 2004; 42(1 Suppl): I7-16.
3. Rasch G. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Nielsen & Lydich, 1960.
4. Rosenbaum PR. Criterion-related construct validity. Psychometrika 1989; 54(4): 625-633.
5. Rasch G. An Informal Report on a Theory of Objectivity in Comparisons. Psychological Measurement Theory. Van der Kamp LJTh, Vlek CAJ, Leyden: University of Leyden, 1967; 1-19.
6. Andersen EB. Sufficient statistics and latent trait models. Psychometrika 1977; 42: 69-81.
7. Bartholomew DJ. The Statistical Approach to Social Measurement. San Diego: Academic Press, 1996.
8. Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1993.
9. Groenvold M, Bjorner JB, Klee MC, Kreiner S. Test for item bias in a quality of life questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1995; 48(6): 805-816.
10. Petersen MA, Groenvold M, Bjorner JB et al. Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire. Quality of Life Research 2003; 12(4): 373-385.
11. Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the PRO-ESOR project. Medical Care 2004; 42(1 Suppl): I37-I48.
12. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK et al. The use of differential item functioning analyses to identify cultural differences in responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research 2007; 16(1): 115-129.
13. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Bottomley A et al. Comparing translations of the EORTC QLQ-C30 using differential item functioning analyses. Quality of Life Research 2006; 15(6): 1103-1115.
14. Brodersen J, Thorsen H, Kreiner S. Validation of a condition-specific measure for women having an abnormal screening mammography. Value in Health 2007; 10(4): 294-304.
15. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1977; (1): 385-401.
16. Cole JC, Rabin AS, Smith TL, Kaufman AS. Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychology Assessment 2004; 16(4): 360-372.
17. Masters GN. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika 1982; 47: 149-174.
18. RUMM2020 [RUMM Laboratory Pty Ltd. http://www.mmmlab.com/; 2005.
19. Andrich D, Luo G. Conditional pairwise estimation in the Rasch model for ordered response categories using principal components. Journal of Applied Measurement 2003; 4(3): 205-221.
20. Wright BD, Panchapakesan N. A procedure for sample-free item analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1969; 29: 23-48.
21. Kreiner S, Christensen KB. Validity and objectivity in health related summated scales: analysis by graphical loglinear Rasch models. In: von Davier M Carstensen CH, editors. Multivariate and Mixture Distribution Rasch Models: Extensions and Applications. New York: Springer Verlag, 2006; 329-346.
22. Hagquist C, Andrich D. Is the sense of coherence-instrument applicable on adolescents? A latent trait analysis using Rasch-modelling. Personality and Individual Differences 2004; 36(4): 955-968.
23. Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. 2006. http://www.fda.gov/cder/ guidance/5460dft.pdf, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration.
24. Reflection Paper on the Regulatory Guidance for the Use of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) Measures in the Evaluation of Medical Products. 27-7-2005. http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/ewp/13939104en.pdf, European Medicines Agency.
25. Brodersen J. Measuring Psychosocial Consequences Of False-Positive Screening Results - Breast Cancer As An Example. Department of General Practice, Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen: Månedsskrift for Praktisk Laegegerning, Copenhagen. ISBN: 87-88638-36-7; 2006.