Development of a Computerized Adaptive Test to Assess Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults with Asthma

References

• Busse WW. National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Expert Panel Report 3. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007; 120(5S1):S94–S138.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Institutes of Health. Expert Panel Report 3: Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma. Bethesda, MD: National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Revicki D, Weiss KB. Clinical assessment of asthma symptom control: review of current assessment instruments. J Asthma 2006; 43(7):481–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wainer H, Dorans NJ, Eignor D, Flaugher R, Green B, Mislevy R, Steinberg L, Thissen D. Computer-Adaptive Testing: A Primer. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Anatchkova MD, Saris-Baglama RN, Kosinski M, Bjorner JB. Development and preliminary testing of a computerized adaptive assessment of chronic pain. J Pain 2009; 10(9):932–943.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjorner JB, Chang CH, Thissen D, Reeve BB. Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res 2007; 16(Suppl. 1):95–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosinski M, Bjorner JB, Ware JE, Sullivan E, Straus WL. An evaluation of a patient-reported outcomes found computerized adaptive testing was efficient in assessing osteoarthritis impact. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59:715–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose M, Bjorner JB, Becker J, Fries JF, Ware JE. Evaluation of a preliminary physical function item bank supported the expected advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61(1):17–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz C, Welch G, Santiago-Kelly P, Bode R, Sun X. Computerized adaptive testing of diabetes impact: a feasibility study of Hispanics and non-Hispanics in an active clinic population. Qual Life Res 2006; 15(9):1503–1518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware JE, Bayliss MS. The practical assessment of headache impact using item response theory and computerized adaptive testing. Qual Life Res 2003; 12:887–1012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeatts KB, Stucky B, Thissen D, Irwin D, Varni JW, DeWitt EM, Lai JS, DeWalt DA. Construction of the Pediatric Asthma Impact Scale (PAIS) for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). J Asthma 2010; 47(3):295–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams R, Rosier M, Campbell D, Ruffin R. Assessment of an asthma quality of life scale using item-response theory. Respirology 2005; 10(5):587–593.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metz SM, Wyrwich KW, Babu AN, Kroenke K, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD. A comparison of traditional and Rasch cut points for assessing clinically important change in health-related quality of life among patients with asthma. Qual Life Res 2006; 15(10):1639–1649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang CH, Sharp LK, Kimmel LG, Grammer LC, Kee R, Shannon JJ. A 6-item brief measure for assessing perceived control of asthma in culturally diverse patients. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2007; 99(2):130–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed S, Ernst P, Tamblyn R, Colman N. Evaluating asthma control: a comparison of measures using an item response theory approach. J Asthma 2007; 44(7):547–554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Bowker DM, Saris-Baglama RN, Anatchkova M, Mosen DA. Computerized asthma outcomes measure is feasible for disease management. Am J Pharm Benefits 2010; 2(2):119–124.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turner-Bowker DM, Saris-Baglama RN, Derosa MA, Paulsen CA, Bransfield CP. Using qualitative research to inform the development of a comprehensive outcomes assessment for asthma. Patient 2009; 2(1):269–282.
   Google Scholar
• Nathan RA, Sorkness CA, Kosinski M, Schatz M, Li JT, Marcus P, Murray JJ, Pendergraft TB. Development of the asthma control test: a survey for assessing asthma control. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004; 113(1):59–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayliss MS, Kosinski M, Turner-Bowker DM, Fortin E. Asthma Control Test™: A User’s Guide. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Bjorner JB, Turner-Bowker DM. Generic instruments for health status assessment: the SF-36® and SF-12® Health Surveys. In: Kattan MW, Cowen M, eds. Encyclopedia of Medical Decision-Making. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2009; 1030–1036.
   Google Scholar
• Ware JE, Kosinski M, Turner-Bowker DM, Gandek B. How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12® Health Survey (With a Supplement Documenting Version 1). Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Marks GB, Dunn SM, Woolcock AJ. A scale for the measurement of quality of life in adults with asthma. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45(5):461–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayliss MS, Larrat EP, Perfetto EM, Buchner D, Ware JE. ITG-Asthma Short Form Manual and Interpretation Guide. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Bjorner JB, Kosinski M, Ware Jr. JE. Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the headache impact test (HIT). Qual Life Res 2003; 12(8):913–933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén B. A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika 1984; 49:115–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus (Version 5.21) Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Drasgow F. Polychoric and polyserial correlations. In: Kotz S, Johnson NL, Read CB, eds. Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1986:68–74.
   Google Scholar
• Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 1999; 6(1):1–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reise SP, Morizot J, Hays RD. The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Qual Life Res 2007; 16(Suppl. 1):19–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramsay JO. TestGraf. A Program for the Graphical Analysis of Multiple Choice Test and Questionnaire Data. Montreal: McGill University, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Muraki E. A generalized partial credit model. In: Van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK, eds. Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. Berlin: Springer, 1997; 153–164.
   Google Scholar
• Muraki E, Brock RD. Parscale: IRT Based Test Scoring and Item Analysis for Graded Open-Ended Exercises and Performance Tasks. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software, Inc, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Orlando M, Thissen D. Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Appl Psych Meas 2000; 24(1):50–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SAS. Statistical Analysis Software for Windows [computer program]. Version 9.0. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Holland PW, Wainer H, Educational Testing Service. Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Swaminathan H, Rogers JH. Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. J Educ Meas 1990; 27:361–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagelkerke NJD. Miscellanea. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika 1991; 78:691–692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware Jr. JE, Kosinski M, Bjorner JB, Bayliss MS, Batenhorst A, Dahlof CG, Tepper S, Dowson A. Applications of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) to the assessment of headache impact. Qual Life Res 2003; 12(8):935–952.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHorney CA, Ware Jr. JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31:247–263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol 1948; 32(3):221–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kincaid JP, Fishburne RP, Rogers RL, Chissom BS. Deviation of new readability formulas (automated readability index, fog count, and Flesch Reading Ease formula) for navy enlisted personnel. Report Rbr-8-75, 1975 February, Research Branch, Naval Technical Training Command, Millington, TN, 1975.
   Google Scholar
• Farr JN, Jenkins JJ, Paterson DG. Simplification of Flesch Reading Ease formula. J Appl Psychol 1951; 35(5):333–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook KF, Kallen MA, Amtmann D. Having a fit: impact of number of items and distribution of data on traditional criteria for assessing IRT’s unidimensionality assumption. Qual Life Res 2009; 18(4):447–460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald RP. Test Theory: A Unified Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999.
   Google Scholar