ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2019
Many ways to skin a cat: psychometric methods options illustrated.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Swedish version of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale: A psychometric evaluation among adolescents.Addictive behaviors reports · 2026Article
- The psychometric properties of the Pearlin Mastery Scale in persons living with restless legs syndrome.PloS one · 2024Article
- THE DEPRESSION INVENTORY DEVELOPMENT SCALE: Assessment of Psychometric Properties Using Classical and Modern Measurement Theory in a CAN-BIND Trial.Innovations in clinical neuroscience · 2020Article
- State of the psychometric methods: patient-reported outcome measure development and refinement using item response theory.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2019Article
- State of the psychometric methods: comments on the ISOQOL SIG psychometric papers.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe three articles in this issue from members of the Psychometric Special Interest Group (SIG) of the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) examine three different psychometric techniques researchers use to analyze item and scale properties of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument. The articles illustrate their respective strengths and weaknesses. MAIN TEXT: Many published articles use one of the three methodologies analyzed by the authors and the reader should have a basic familiarity with the assumptions, approaches, and statistical techniques behind each analysis. These three papers shed light on some of the conundrums facing developers and users of PRO measures and data regarding what method and instruments to use. These papers have used a dataset on depressive symptoms to show that no attempt to measure such a complex feeling domain as depressed mood can cover the entire spectrum of the experience.
conclusionsAs a group, these three papers will help readers evaluate published articles on instruments using one or more approaches as well as providing general education on these statistical methods in application.
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.