Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29468387›Full record

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

Assessing the equivalence of Web-based and paper-and-pencil questionnaires using differential item and test functioning (DIF and DTF) analysis: a case of the Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ).

Berend Terluin, Evelien P M Brouwers, Miquelle A G Marchand, Henrica C W de Vet

Abstract readComparative Study
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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Berend TerluinDepartment of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. b.terluin@vumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-8944-5238
Evelien P M BrouwersScientific Center for Care and Welfare (Tranzo), Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Miquelle A G MarchandCentERdata Institute for Data Collection and Research, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Henrica C W de VetDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMany paper-and-pencil (P&P) questionnaires have been migrated to electronic platforms. Differential item and test functioning (DIF and DTF) analysis constitutes a superior research design to assess measurement equivalence across modes of administration. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate an item response theory (IRT)-based DIF and DTF analysis to assess the measurement equivalence of a Web-based version and the original P&P format of the Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ), measuring distress, depression, anxiety, and somatization.

methodsThe P&P group (n = 2031) and the Web group (n = 958) consisted of primary care psychology clients. Unidimensionality and local independence of the 4DSQ scales were examined using IRT and Yen's Q3. Bifactor modeling was used to assess the scales' essential unidimensionality. Measurement equivalence was assessed using IRT-based DIF analysis using a 3-stage approach: linking on the latent mean and variance, selection of anchor items, and DIF testing using the Wald test. DTF was evaluated by comparing expected scale scores as a function of the latent trait.

resultsThe 4DSQ scales proved to be essentially unidimensional in both modalities. Five items, belonging to the distress and somatization scales, displayed small amounts of DIF. DTF analysis revealed that the impact of DIF on the scale level was negligible.

conclusionsIRT-based DIF and DTF analysis is demonstrated as a way to assess the equivalence of Web-based and P&P questionnaire modalities. Data obtained with the Web-based 4DSQ are equivalent to data obtained with the P&P version.

Indexed as

InternetAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnxietyAnxiety DisordersDepressionDepressive DisorderFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CarePsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychophysiologic DisordersBifactor modelDifferential item functioningDifferential test functioningMeasurement equivalencePaper-and-pencil questionnaireWeb-based questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID29468387
PMCPMC5891556

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.