Relative validity of the modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (M-ASES) questionnaire using item response theory

Rheumatology International

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 217-223

  Cook, Chad ^a,b   Hegedus, Eric ^b   Goode, Adam ^b   Mina, Curtis ^c   Pietrobon, Ricardo ^a   Higgins, Lawrence D ^d  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY   (United States)

^d BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon's questionnaire; Item response theory; M ASES

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AMERICAN SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGEONS QUESTIONNAIRE; ARTICLE; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; DEMOGRAPHY; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HAND DISEASE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MENTAL FUNCTION; MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION; PHYSICAL CAPACITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCHOOL CHILD; SHOULDER; THEORY; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS; WRIST DISEASE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHILD; DATA COLLECTION; ELBOW JOINT; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT PARTICIPATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); SHOULDER JOINT; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 37249050285     PISSN: 01728172     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00296-007-0420-8     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Beaton D, Richards RR (1998) Assessing the reliability and responsiveness of 5 shoulder questionnaires. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 7:565-572
2. Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN (2005) Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1038-1046
3. Bhakta B, Tennant A, Horton M, Lawton G, Andrich D (2005) Using item response theory to explore the psychometric properties of extended matching questions examination in undergraduate medical education. BMC Med Educ 5:9
4. Bot SD, Terwee CB, van der Windt DA, Bouter LM, Dekker J, de Vet HC (2004) Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Rheum Dis 63:335-341
5. Chang CH, Reeve BB (2005) Item response theory and its applications to patient-reported outcomes measurement. Eval Health Prof 28:264-282
6. Cook KF, Gartsman GM, Roddey TS, Olson SL (2001) The measurement level and trait-specific reliability of 4 scales of shoulder functioning: an empiric investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82:1558-1565
7. Dowrick AS, Gabbe BJ, Williamson OD, Cameron PA (2005) Outcome instruments for the assessment of the upper extremity following trauma: a review. Injury 36:468-476
8. Embretson S, Reise S (2000) Item response theory for psychologists. Hillsdale, Erlbaum
9. Hays RD, Morales LS, Reise SP (2000) Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Med Care 38:II28-II42
10. Holbrook M, Skilbeck CE (1983) An activities index for use with stroke patients. Age Ageing 12:166-170
11. Kocher MS, Horan MP, Briggs KK, Richardson TR, O'Holleran J, Hawkins RJ (2005) Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons subjective shoulder scale in patients with shoulder instability, rotator cuff disease, and glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2006-2011
12. Liang MH (2000) Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Med Care 38:II84-II90
13. Masters G (1982) A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika 47:149-173
14. McClure P, Michener L (2003) Measures of adult shoulder function. Arthritis Rheum 49:50-58
15. McHorney C, Ware JJ, Lu J, Sherbourne C (1994) 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 32:40-66
16. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE (1993) 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 31:247-263
17. Mellenbergh G (1994) Generalized linear item response theory. Psychol Bull 15:300-307
18. Michener LA, McClure PW, Sennett BJ (2002) American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11:587-594
19. Patrick DL, Chiang YP (2000) Measurement of health outcomes in treatment effectiveness evaluations: conceptual and methodological challenges. Med Care 38:II14-II25
20. Pietrobon R, Coeytaux RR, Carey TS, Richardson WJ, DeVellis RF (2002) Standard scales for measurement of functional outcome for cervical pain or dysfunction: a systematic review. Spine 27:515-522
21. Razmjou H, Bean A, van Osnabrugge V, MacDermid JC, Holtby R (2006) Cross-sectional and longitudinal construct validity of two rotator cuff disease-specific outcome measures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 7:26
22. Richards R, An K, Bigliani L et al (1994) A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 3:347-352
23. Sallay PI, Reed L (2003) The measurement of normative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12:622-627
24. Steinberg L, Thissen D (1995) Item response theory in personality research. In: Fisk S (ed) Personality research, methods, and theory. Hillsdale, Erlbaum
25. van der Linden W, Hambleton R (1997) Handbook of modern item response theory. New York, Springer
26. Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34:220-233
27. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473-483