ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2017
Item usage in a multidimensional computerized adaptive test (MCAT) measuring health-related quality of life.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties of computerized adaptive testing for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient-reported outcome measurement.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- Application of Decision Tree Intelligent Algorithm in Data Analysis of Physical Health Test.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Measurement Efficiency for Fixed-Precision Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Tests: Comparing Health Measurement and Educational Testing Using Example Banks.Applied psychological measurement · 2019Article
- Some recommendations for developing multidimensional computerized adaptive tests for patient-reported outcomes.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeExamining item usage is an important step in evaluating the performance of a computerized adaptive test (CAT). We study item usage for a newly developed multidimensional CAT which draws items from three PROMIS domains, as well as a disease-specific one.
methodsThe multidimensional item bank used in the current study contained 194 items from four domains: the PROMIS domains fatigue, physical function, and ability to participate in social roles and activities, and a disease-specific domain (the COPD-SIB). The item bank was calibrated using the multidimensional graded response model and data of 795 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. To evaluate the item usage rates of all individual items in our item bank, CAT simulations were performed on responses generated based on a multivariate uniform distribution. The outcome variables included active bank size and item overuse (usage rate larger than the expected item usage rate).
resultsFor average θ-values, the overall active bank size was 9-10%; this number quickly increased as θ-values became more extreme. For values of -2 and +2, the overall active bank size equaled 39-40%. There was 78% overlap between overused items and active bank size for average θ-values. For more extreme θ-values, the overused items made up a much smaller part of the active bank size: here the overlap was only 35%.
conclusionsOur results strengthen the claim that relatively short item banks may suffice when using polytomous items (and no content constraints/exposure control mechanisms), especially when using MCAT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.