The unidimensionality of the five Brain Injury Rehabilitation Trust Personality Questionnaires (BIRT-PQs) may be improved: preliminary evidence from classical psychometrics

References

• Yeates GN, Gracey F, McGrath JC. A biopsychosocial deconstruction of “Personality change” following acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2008;18(5–6):566–89. doi:10.1080/09602010802151532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norup A, Mortensen EL. Prevalence and predictors of personality change after severe brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(1):56–62. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2014.08.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne-Crowley K, McDonald S. A review of social disinhibition after traumatic brain injury. J Neuropsychol. 2018;12(2):176–99. doi:10.1111/jnp.2018.12.issue-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oddy M. He’s no longer the same person: how families adjust to personality change after head injury. Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. Boston, MA: Springer; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Wood RL. Understanding neurobehavioural disability. In: McMillan TM, Wood RL, editors. Neurobehavioural disability and social handicap following traumatic brain injury. Hove: Psychology Press Ltd; 2001, pp. 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Gouick J, Gentleman D. The emotional and behavioural consequences of traumatic brain injury. Trauma. 2004;6(4):285–92. doi:10.1191/1460408604ta323oa.
   Google Scholar
• Ciurli P, Formisano R, Bivona U, Cantagallo A, Angelelli P. Neuropsychiatric disorders in persons with severe traumatic brain injury: prevalence, phenomenology, and relationship with demographic, clinical, and functional features. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2011;26(2):116–26. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181dedd0e.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cattran CJ, Oddy M, Wood RL, Moir JF. Post-injury personality in the prediction of outcome following severe acquired brain injury. Brain Inj. 2011;25(11):1035–46. doi:10.3109/02699052.2011.607787.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morton MV, Wehman P. Psychosocial and emotional sequelae of individuals with traumatic brain injury: a literature review and recommendations. Brain Inj. 1995;9(1):81–92. doi:10.3109/02699059509004574.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood RL, Yurdakul LK. Change in relationship status following traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 1997;11(7):491–501. doi:10.1080/bij.11.7.491.501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreutzer JS, Gervasio AH, Camplair PS. Primary caregivers’ psychological status and family functioning after traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 1994;8(3):197–210. doi:10.3109/02699059409150973.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milders M. Relationship between social cognition and social behaviour following traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2018;16:1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Nightingale EJ, Soo CA, Tate RLJBI. A systematic review of early prognostic factors for return to work after traumatic brain injury. Brain Impairment. 2007;8(2):101–42. doi:10.1375/brim.8.2.101.
   Google Scholar
• Moretta P, Masotta O, Crispino E, Castronovo G, Ruvolo S, Montalbano C, Loreto V, Trojano L, Estraneo A. Psychological distress is associated with altered cognitive functioning in family caregivers of patients with disorders of consciousness. Brain Inj. 2017;31(8):1088–93. doi:10.1080/02699052.2017.1290278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moretta P, Estraneo A, De Lucia L, Cardinale V, Loreto V, Trojano L. A study of the psychological distress in family caregivers of patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness during in-hospital rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil. 2014;28(7):717–25. doi:10.1177/0269215514521826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zasler ND, Martelli MF, Nicholson K. Post-traumatic pain disorders: Medical Assessment and Management. In: Brain Injury Medicine: Principles and Practice. 2nd edition. Zasler N, Katz D, Zafonte R, editors. New York: Demos Medical; 2013. p. 954–73
   Google Scholar
• Bivona U, Formisano R, Mastrilli L, Zabberoni S, Caltagirone C, Costa A. Theory of mind after severe acquired brain injury: clues for interpretation. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:5205642. doi:10.1155/2018/5205642.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silver JM, McAllister TW, Arciniegas DB, American Psychiatric Association. Textbook of traumatic brain injury. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufer DI. Neurobehavioral assessment. Continuum (Minneap Minn). 2015;21(3Behavioral Neurology and Neuropsychiatry):597–612. doi:10.1212/01.CON.0000466655.51790.2f.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shukla D, Devi BI, Agrawal A. Outcome measures for traumatic brain injury. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2011;113(6):435–41. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2011.02.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oddy M, Cattran C, Wood R. The development of a measure of motivational changes following acquired brain injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2008;30(5):568–75. doi:10.1080/13803390701555598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cattran C, OddyM, Wood R. The development of a measure of emotional regulation following acquired brain injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2011;33(6):672–79. doi:10.1080/13803395.2010.550603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyde CJ. The measurement and impact of five personality changes after brain injury. Swansea: University of Wales; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Basagni B, Navarrete E, Bertoni D, Cattran C, Mapelli D, Oddy M, De Tanti A. The Italian version of the Brain Injury Rehabilitation Trust (BIRT) personality questionnaires: five new measures of personality change after acquired brain injury. Neurol Sci. 2015;36(10):1793–98. doi:10.1007/s10072-015-2251-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucukdeveci AA, Tennant A, Grimby G, Franchignoni F. Strategies for assessment and outcome measurement in physical and rehabilitation medicine: an educational review. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(8):661–72. doi:10.2340/16501977-0844.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones C. Glasgow coma scale. Am J Nurs. 1979;79(9):1551–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagen C, Malkmus D, Durham P. Levels of cognitive functioning. rehabilitation of the head injured adult: comprehensive physical management. Dowey, CA: Professional Staff Association of the Rancho Los Amigos Hospital, Inc.; 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Wade DT, Collin C. The Barthel ADL Index: a standard measure of physical disability? Int Disabil Stud. 1988;10(2):64–67. doi:10.3109/09638288809164105.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• World Medical Association General A. World medical association declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects (revised October 7, 2000). HIV Clin Trials. 2001;2(1):92–95. doi:10.1310/GTFR-2DRX-M6YE-ELXR.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rappaport M, Hall K, Hopkins K, Belleza T, Cope D. Disability rating scale for severe head trauma: coma to community. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63(3):118–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majani G, Callegari S. SAT-P/Satisfaction Profile. Soddisfazione soggettiva e qualità della vita. Trento ; Erickson; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Kertesz A, Davidson W, Fox H. Frontal behavioral inventory: diagnostic criteria for frontal lobe dementia. Can J Neurol Sci. 1997;24(1):29–36. doi:10.1017/S0317167100021053.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberici A, Geroldi C, Cotelli M, Adorni A, Calabria M, Rossi G, Borroni B, Padovani A, Zanetti O, Kertesz A. The frontal behavioural inventory (Italian version) differentiates frontotemporal lobar degeneration variants from Alzheimer’s disease. Neurol Sci. 2007;28(2):80–86. doi:10.1007/s10072-007-0791-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caserta MS, Lund DA, Wright SD. Exploring the Caregiver Burden Inventory (CBI): further evidence for a multidimensional view of burden. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 1996;43(1):21–34. doi:10.2190/2DKF-292P-A53W-W0A8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long JS. Confirmatory factor analysis: a preface to LISREL. Newbury, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications; 1983.
   Google Scholar
• McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4(4):293–307. doi:10.1007/BF01593882.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314(7080):572. doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7080.572.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J,  Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickrey BG, Hays RD, Harooni R, Myers LW, Ellison GW. A health-related quality of life measure for multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res. 1995;4(3):187–206. doi:10.1007/BF02260859.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity: basic issues in objective scale development. Psychol Assess. 1995;7(3):309. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yusoff MSB, Rahim AFA, Yaacob MJ. The development and validity of the Medical Student Stressor Questionnaire (MSSQ). ASEAN J Psychiatry. 2010;11(1):231–35.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Hoyle RH. Confirmatory factor analysis. Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling. New York: Academic Press; 2000. 465 p.
   Google Scholar
• La Porta F, Franceschini M, Caselli S, Cavallini P, Susassi S, Tennant A. Unified balance scale: an activity-based, bed to community, and aetiology-independent measure of balance calibrated with Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(5):435–44. doi:10.2340/16501977-0797.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Model: Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with Mplus: basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO. MPlus user’s guide 2010. 6th ed. http://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/.
   Google Scholar
• Lundgren-Nilsson A, Jonsdottir IH, Ahlborg G Jr., Tennant A. Construct validity of the Psychological General Well Being Index (PGWBI) in a sample of patients undergoing treatment for stress-related exhaustion: a Rasch analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:2. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-11-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revicki DA, Chen W, Tucker C. Developing item banks for patient-reported health outcomes. In: Handbook of item response theory modeling: applications to typical performance assessments Reise SP, Revicki DA (eds.), 334-363. New York; Routledge; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Watt T, Groenvold M, Deng N, Gandek B, Feldt-Rasmussen U, Rasmussen AK, Hegedüs L, Bonnema SJ, Bjorner JB. Confirmatory factor analysis of the thyroid-related quality of life questionnaire ThyPRO. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:126. doi:10.1186/s12955-014-0126-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aaronson N, Alonso J, Burnam A, Lohr KN, Patrick DL, Perrin E, Stein RE. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002;11(3):193–205. doi:10.1023/A:1015291021312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 4th ed. Boston (MA): Allyn and Bacon; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Chiavaroli F, Derraik JG, Zani G, Lavezzi S, Chiavaroli V, Sherwin E, VìBasaglia N. Epidemiology and clinical outcomes in a multicentre regional cohort of patients with severe acquired brain injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38(20):2038–46. doi:10.3109/09638288.2015.1111439.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobart J, Cano S. Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: the role of new psychometric methods. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(12):iii, ix-x, 1–177. doi:10.3310/hta13120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piscitelli D, Pellicciari L. Responsiveness: is it time to move beyond ordinal scores and approach interval measurements? Clin Rehabil. 2018;32(10):1426–27. doi:10.1177/0269215518794069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Porta F, Caselli S, Susassi S, Cavallini P, Tennant A, Franceschini M. Is the Berg balance scale an internally valid and reliable measure of balance across different etiologies in neurorehabilitation? A revisited Rasch analysis study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(7):1209–16. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2012.02.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellicciari L, Piscitelli D, Caselli S, La Porta F. A Rasch analysis of the Conley Scale in patients admitted to a general hospital. Disabil Rehabil.2019;41(23):2807-16. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1478000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundgren Nilsson A, Tennant A. Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: the functional independence measure (FIM) revisited. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(10):884–91. doi:10.2340/16501977-0871.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marais I. Local dependence. London Hoboken, NJ: ISTE, John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(8):1358–62. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1529-0131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolstad S, Adler J, Ryden A. Response burden and questionnaire length: is shorter better? A review and meta-analysis. Value Health. 2011;14(8):1101–08. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrillo J, Cano SJ, McLeod LD, Coon CD. Using classical test theory, item response theory, and Rasch measurement theory to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures: a comparison of worked examples. Value Health. 2015;18(1):25–34. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.10.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar