Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30852765›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2019

Supporting construct validity of the Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire using Linear Logistic Test Models.

Núria Duran Adroher, Alan Tennant

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05244824 (Adaptation of Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

NCT05244824 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Adaptation of Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire (EDAQ) Into Turkish, Examining The Reliability and Validity For People With Rheumatoid Arthritis

TypeobservationalSponsorHacettepe UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled210ConditionsArthritis, Rheumatoid, Activities of Daily LivingArmsAdaptation into Turkish, Examining The Reliability and Validity for People with RA
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Núria Duran AdroherSwiss Paraplegic Research, Guido A. Zäch Strasse 4, 6207, Nottwil, Switzerland. nuria.duranadroher@paraplegie.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2668-1820
Alan TennantSwiss Paraplegic Research, Guido A. Zäch Strasse 4, 6207, Nottwil, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeConstruct validity is commonly assessed by applying statistical methods to data. However, purely empirical methods cannot explain what happens between the attribute and the instrument scores, which is the core of construct validity. Linear Logistic Test Models (LLTMs) can provide such explanation by decomposing item difficulties into a weighted sum of theoretical item properties. In this study, we aim to support construct validity of the Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire (EDAQ) by using item properties accounting for item difficulties.

methodsDichotomized responses to the EDAQ were analyzed with (1) the Rasch model (to estimate item difficulties), and (2) LLTMs (to predict item difficulties). Seven properties of the items were identified and rated in ordinal scales by 39 Occupational Therapists worldwide. Aggregated metric estimates-the weights used to predict item difficulties in LLTMs-were derived from the ratings using seven cumulative link mixed models. Estimated and predicted item difficulties were compared.

resultsThe Rasch model showed acceptable fit and unidimensionality for a sample of 42 locally independent EDAQ items. The LLTM plus error showed significantly better fit than the LLTM. In the former, three of the seven properties were not significant, and the corresponding model including only the significant properties was used to predict item difficulties; they explained 77.5% of the variance in estimated item difficulties.

conclusionA satisfactory theoretical explanation of what makes an activity of daily living task more difficult than another has been provided by a LLTM plus error model, therefore supporting construct validity of the EDAQ.

Indexed as

Linear ModelsLogistic ModelsActivities of Daily LivingFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesActivities of daily livingConstruct validityCumulative link mixed modelLinear logistic test modelRasch measurement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.