Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28836090›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2018

The use of latent variable mixture models to identify invariant items in test construction.

Richard Sawatzky, Lara B Russell, Tolulope T Sajobi, Lisa M Lix, Jacek Kopec, Bruno D Zumbo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2018. 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. Unsupervised item response theory models for assessing sample heterogeneity in patient-reported outcomes measures.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Introduction to special section: test construction.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018
    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

6 authors.

Richard SawatzkySchool of Nursing, Trinity Western University, 7600 Glover Rd, Langley, BC, V2Y1Y1, Canada. rick.sawatzky@twu.ca.
Lara B RussellCentre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Tolulope T SajobiDepartment of Community Health Sciences & O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Lisa M LixDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Jacek KopecSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Bruno D ZumboMeasurement, Evaluation & Research Methodology Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

CIHR MOP-142404
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are frequently used in heterogeneous patient populations. PROM scores may lead to biased inferences when sources of heterogeneity (e.g., gender, ethnicity, and social factors) are ignored. Latent variable mixture models (LVMMs) can be used to examine measurement invariance (MI) when sources of heterogeneity in the population are not known a priori. The goal of this article is to discuss the use of LVMMs to identify invariant items within the context of test construction.

methodsThe Draper-Lindely-de Finetti (DLD) framework for the measurement of latent variables provides a theoretical context for the use of LVMMs to identify the most invariant items in test construction. In an expository analysis using 39 items measuring daily activities, LVMMs were conducted to compare 1- and 2-class item response theory models (IRT). If the 2-class model had better fit, item-level logistic regression differential item functioning (DIF) analyses were conducted to identify items that were not invariant. These items were removed and LVMMs and DIF testing repeated until all remaining items showed MI.

resultsThe 39 items had an essentially unidimensional measurement structure. However, a 1-class IRT model resulted in many statistically significant bivariate residuals, indicating suboptimal fit due to remaining local dependence. A 2-class LVMM had better fit. Through subsequent rounds of LVMMs and DIF testing, nine items were identified as being most invariant.

conclusionsThe DLD framework and the use of LVMMs have significant potential for advancing theoretical developments and research on item selection and the development of PROMs for heterogeneous populations.

Indexed as

Latent Class AnalysisPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAnalysis of VarianceEthnicityFemaleHumansMaleQuality of LifeResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesDifferential item functioningLatent variable mixture modelsMeasurement invarianceTest construction

Identifiers

PMID28836090
PMCPMC5997718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.