Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27667878›Full record

ArticleApplied psychological measurement2016

A novel method for expediting the development of patient-reported outcome measures and an evaluation across several populations.

Lili Garrard, Larry R Price, Marjorie J Bott, Byron J Gajewski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lili GarrardDivision of Biometrics III, OB/OTS/CDER, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993.
Larry R PriceCollege of Education, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA.
Marjorie J BottUniversity of Kansas School of Nursing, Mail Stop 4043, 3901 Rainbow Blvd., Kansas City, KS 66160, USA.
Byron J GajewskiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Mail Stop 1026, 3901 Rainbow Blvd., Kansas City, KS 66160, USA; University of Kansas School of Nursing, Mail Stop 4043, 3901 Rainbow Blvd., Kansas City, KS 66160, USA.

Funding

Transgenic & Gene-Targeting Shared ResourceP30CA168524 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI NICOLE L NOLLEN · 2012 to 2026
$40.1M
Project 2P20MD004805 · NIMHD · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI DALEY, CHRISTINE MAKOSKY, GREINER, K ALLEN · 2010 to 2014
$7.6M
A Novel Method for Expediting the Development of Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresR03NR013236 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI GAJEWSKI, BYRON J. · 2014 to 2015
$149k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA168524NIMHD NIH HHS P20 MD004805NINR NIH HHS R03 NR013236
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Item response theory (IRT) models provide an appropriate alternative to the classical ordinal confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) during the development of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Current literature has identified the assessment of IRT model fit as both challenging and underdeveloped (Sinharay & Johnson, 2003; Sinharay, Johnson, & Stern, 2006). This study evaluates the performance of Ordinal Bayesian Instrument Development (OBID), a Bayesian IRT model with a probit link function approach, through applications in two breast cancer-related instrument development studies. The primary focus is to investigate an appropriate method for comparing Bayesian IRT models in PROMs development. An exact Bayesian leave-one-out cross-validation (LOO-CV) approach (Vehtari & Lampinen, 2002) is implemented to assess prior selection for the item discrimination parameter in the IRT model and subject content experts' bias (in a statistical sense and not to be confused with psychometric bias as in differential item functioning) toward the estimation of item-to-domain correlations. Results support the utilization of content subject experts' information in establishing evidence for construct validity when sample size is small. However, the incorporation of subject experts' content information in the OBID approach can be sensitive to the level of expertise of the recruited experts. More stringent efforts need to be invested in the appropriate selection of subject experts to efficiently use the OBID approach and reduce potential bias during PROMs development.

Indexed as

Bayesian IRTBayesian leave-one-out cross-validationBayesian model comparisonOBIDpatient-reported outcome measuresPROMs

Identifiers

PMID27667878
PMCPMC5029789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.