Investigating the internal validity of the Trunk Impairment Scale (TIS) using Rasch analysis: The TIS 2.0

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 32, Issue 25, 2010, Pages 2127-2137

  Verheyden, Geert ^a   Kersten, Paula ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

assessment; measurement; sitting balance; Stroke; validity

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; BODY EQUILIBRIUM; DISABILITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY; STROKE; THEORETICAL MODEL; VALIDATION STUDY;

AGED; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; POSTURAL BALANCE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STROKE;

EID: 78249280033     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: 14645165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2010.483038     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Wade DT, Skilbeck CE, Hewer RL. Predicting barthel ADL score at 6 months after an acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1983;64:24-28.
2. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Kollen BJ, Lankhorst GJ. Predicting disability in stroke - a critical review of the literature. Age Ageing 1996;25:479-489.
3. Hsieh CL, Sheu CF, Hsueh IP, Wang CH. Trunk control as an early predictor of comprehensive activities of daily living function in stroke participants. Stroke 2002;33:2626-2630.
4. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, De Wit L, Feys H, Schuback B, Baert I, Jenni W, Schupp W, Thijs V, De Weerdt W. Trunk performance after stroke: an eye catching predictor of functional outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2007;78:694-698.
5. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, Mertin J, Preger R, Kiekens C, De Weerdt W. The Trunk Impairment Scale: a new tool to measure motor impairment of the trunk after stroke. Clin Rehabil 2004;18:326-334.
6. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, Feys H, Thijs V, Vaes K, De Weerdt W. Discriminant ability of the Trunk Impairment Scale: a comparison between stroke participants and healthy individuals. Disabil Rehabil 2005;27:1023-1028.
7. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, Van de Winckel A, De Weerdt W. Clinical tools to measure trunk performance after stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Rehabil 2007;21:387-394.
8. Tyson SF, Connell LA. How to measure balance in clinical practice. A systematic review of the psychometrics and clinical utility of measures of balance activity for neurological conditions. Clin Rehabil 2009;23:824-840.
9. Engberg A, Garde B, Kreiner S. Rasch analysis in the development of a rating scale for assessment of mobility after stroke. Acta Neurol Scand 1995;91:118-127.
10. Antonucci G, Aprile T, Paolucci S. Rasch analysis of the Rivermead Mobility Index: a study using mobility measures of first-stroke participants. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1442-1449.
11. Linn RT, Blair RS, Granger CV, Harper DW, O'Hara PA, Maciura E. Does the functional assessment measure (FAM) extend the functional independence measure (FIM) instrument? A Rasch analysis of stroke participants. J Outcome Meas 1999;3:339-359.
12. Hsueh IP, Wang WC, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. Rasch analysis of combining two indices to assess comprehensive ADL function in stroke participants. Stroke 2004;35:721-726.
13. Lundgren-Nilsson A, Grimby G, Ring H, Tesio L, Lawton G, Slade A, Penta M, Tripolski M, Biering-Sørensen F, Carter J, Marincek C, Phillips S, Simone A, Tennant A. Cross-cultural validity of functional independence measure items in stroke: a study using Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med 2005;37:23-31.
14. Dallmeier AJ, de Groot V, Roorda LD, Schepers VP, Lindeman E, Van den Berg LH, Beelen A, Dekker J; FuPro Study Group. Cross-diagnostic validity of the SF-36 physical functioning scale in participants with stroke, multiple sclerosis and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a study using Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med 2007;39:163-169.
15. Penta M, Tesio L, Arnould C, Zancan A, Thonnard JL. The ABILHAND questionnaire as a measure of manual ability in chronic stroke participants: Rasch-based validation and relationship to upper limb impairment. Stroke 2001;32:1627-1634.
16. Van de Winckel A, Feys H, Van der Knaap S, Messerli R, Baronti F, Lehmann R, Van Hemelrijk B, Pante F, Perfetti C, De Weerdt W. Can quality of movement be measured? Rasch analysis and inter-rater reliability of the motor evaluation scale for upper extremity in stroke participants (MESUPES). Clin Rehabil 2006;20:871-884.
17. Van de Winckel A, Feys H, Lincoln N, De Weerdt W. Assessment of arm function in stroke participants: Rivermead Motor Assessment arm section revised with Rasch analysis. Clin Rehabil 2007;21:471-479.
18. Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S, Perera S; Glycine Antagonist in Neuroprotection Americans Investigators. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003;84:950-963.
19. Lin JH, Wang WC, Sheu CF, Lo SK, Hsueh IP, Hsieh CL. A Rasch analysis of a self-perceived change in quality of life scale in participants with mild stroke. Qual Life Res 2005;14:2259-2263.
20. Pickard AS, Dalal MR, Bushnell DM. A comparison of depressive symptoms in stroke and primary care: applying Rasch models to evaluate the center for epidemiologic studiesdepression scale. Value Health 2006;9:59-64.
21. Tang WK, Wong E, Chiu HF, Ungvari GS. Rasch analysis of the scoring scheme of the HADS Depression subscale in Chinese stroke participants. Psychiatry Res 2007;150:97-103.
22. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: MESA Press, 1980.
23. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Chicago: MESA Press, 1982.
24. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, De Wit L, Thijs V, Dobbelaere J, Devos H, Severijns D, Vanbeveren S, De Weerdt W. Time course of trunk, arm, leg, and functional recovery after ischemic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008;22:173-179.
25. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J 1965;14:61-65.
26. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch model. Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2001.
27. Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement. London: Sage; 1988.
28. Smith EV. Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Measure 2002;3:205-231.
29. Tennant A, Pallant JF. Unidimensionality matters! (a tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measure Trans 2006;20:1048-1051.
30. Holland PW, Wainer H. Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993.
31. Grimby G. Useful reporting of DIF. Rasch Measure Trans 1998;12:651.
32. Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement series: quantitative applications in the social sciences no. 68. London: Sage Publications; 1988.
33. Wainer H, Kiely G. Item clusters and computer adaptive testing: a case for testlets. J Educ Measure 1987;24:185-202.
34. Andrich D. Rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrica 1978;43:561-573.
35. Masters G. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrica 1982;47:149-174.
36. Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Care Res 2007;57:1358-1362.
37. Andrich D, Lyne A, Sheridan B, Luo G. RUMM 2020. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2003.
38. Linacre JM. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measur Trans 1994;7:328.
39. Wright BD, Tennant A. Sample size again. Rasch Measure Trans 1996;9:468.
40. Bland JM, Altman DG. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995;310:170.
41. Tesio L, Simone A, Bernardinello M. Rehabilitation and outcome measurement: where is Rasch analysis-going? Europa Medicophysica 2007;43:417-426.