Development and psychometric characteristics of the SCI-QOL Ability to Participate and Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities item banks and short forms

Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 397-408

  Heinemann, Allen W ^a   Kisala, Pamela A ^b   Hahn, Elizabeth A ^a   Tulsky, David S ^b,c  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE   (United States)

^c KESSLER FOUNDATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Community participation; Quality of life; Social participation; Spinal cord injuries

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT ERROR; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL COMPETENCE; SPINAL CORD INJURY; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SATISFACTION; STANDARDS;

ADULT; CALIBRATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONAL SATISFACTION; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SPINAL CORD INJURIES; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84941201312     PISSN: 10790268     EISSN: 20457723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/2045772315Y.0000000028     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Whiteneck GG. Issues affecting the selection of participation measurement in outcomes research and clinical trials. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91(9):S54-S9.
2. Magasi S, Post MW. A comparative review of contemporary participation measures' psychometric properties and content coverage. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91(9):S17-28.
3. Dijkers MP. Issues in the conceptualization and measurement of participation: an overview. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91(9Suppl1):S5-S16.
4. NIH Common Fund 2013 [updated May 20, 2013]. National Institutes of Health Web Site]. Available from: http://www.nihroadmap.nih.gov/.
5. Quatrano L, Cruz T. Future of outcomes measurement: impact on research in medical rehabilitation and neurologic populations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92(10 Suppl):S7-11.
6. Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, et al. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:1179-94.
7. Stone K. NINDS Common data element project: a long-awaited breakthrough in streamlining trials. Ann Neurol 2010;68: A11-A3.
8. DeWalt DA, Rothrock N, Yount S, Stone AA, Group PC. Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review. Med Care 2007;45(5 Suppl 1):S12-21.
9. Castel LD, Williams KA, Bosworth HB, Eisen SV, Hahn EA, Irwin DE, et al. Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: a qualitative analysis of focus-group data. Qual Life Res 2008;17(5):737-49.
10. Hahn EA, DeWalt DA, Bode RK, Garcia SF, DeVellis RF, Correia H, et al. New English and Spanish social health measures will facilitate evaluating health determinants. Health Psychol 2014;33(5):490-9.
11. Hahn EA, Devellis RF, Bode RK, Garcia SF, Castel LD, Eisen SV, et al. Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): item bank development and testing. Qual Life Res 2010;19(7):1035-44.
12. Tulsky DS, Kisala PA, Victorson D, Choi SW, Gershon R, Heinemann AW, et al. Methodology for the development and calibration of the SCI-QOL item banks. J Spinal Cord Med 2015;38(3):270-87.
13. Tulsky DS, Kisala PA, Victorson D, Tate D, Heinemann AW, Charlifue S, et al. Overview of the Spinal Cord Injury - Quality of Life (SCI-QOL) measurement system. J Spinal Cord Med 2015;38(3):257-69.
14. Tulsky DS, Kisala PA, Victorson D, Tate D, Heinemann AW, Amtmann D, et al. Developing a contemporary patient-reported outcomes measure for spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92(10):S44-51.
15. PROMIS. PROMIS Instrument Development and Psychometric Evaluation Scientific Standards 2012 [12/27/2012]. Available from: http://www.nihpromis.org/Documents/PROMIS-Standards-050212.pdf.
16. Willis GB. Cognitive Interviewing: a 'how to' guide. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute, 1999.
17. MetaMetrics. The LEXILE framework for reading. Durham, NC: MetaMetrics Inc; 1995.
18. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling 1999;6(1):1-55.
19. Samejima F. Graded response model. Handbook of modern item response theory. In: van der Liden WJ, Hambleton R, eds. New York: Springer; 1997. p. 85-100.
20. Bjorner JB, Smith K, Stone C, Sun X. IRTFIT: A Macro for Item Fit and Local Dependence Tests under IRT Models. 2007.
21. Orlando M, Thissen D. Further investigation of the performance of S-X2: An item fit index for use with dichotomous item response theory models. Appl Psych Meas 2003;27(4):289-98.
22. Choi SW, Gibbons LE, Crane PK. Lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. J Stat Softw. 2011;39(8):1.
23. Stocking ML, Lord FM. Developing a common metric in item response theory. Appl Psych Meas 1983;7(2):201-10.