IRT Health Outcomes Data Analysis Project: an Overview and Summary

Published in: Quality of Life Research, v. 16, suppl. 1, Aug. 2007, p. 121-132

Posted on RAND.org on December 31, 2006

by Karon F. Cook, Cayla R. Teal, Jakob B. Bjorner, David Cella, Chih-Hung Chang, Paul K. Crane, Laura E. Gibbons, Ron D. Hays, Colleen A. McHorney, Katja Ocepek-Welikson, Anastasia E. Raczek, Jeanne A. Teresi, Bryce B. Reeve

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.springerlink.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND: In June 2004, the National Cancer Institute and the Drug Information Association co-sponsored the conference, Improving the Measurement of Health Outcomes through the Applications of Item Response Theory (IRT) Modeling: Exploration of Item Banks and Computer-Adaptive Assessment. A component of the conference was presentation of a psychometric and content analysis of a secondary dataset. OBJECTIVES: A thorough psychometric and content analysis was conducted of two primary domains within a cancer health-related quality of life (HRQOL) dataset. RESEARCH DESIGN: HRQOL scales were evaluated using factor analysis for categorical data, IRT modeling, and differential item functioning analyses. In addition, computerized adaptive administration of HRQOL item banks was simulated, and various IRT models were applied and compared. SUBJECTS: The original data were collected as part of the NCI-funded Quality of Life Evaluation in Oncology (Q-Score) Project. A total of 1,714 patients with cancer or HIV/AIDS were recruited from 5 clinical sites. MEASURES:Items from 4 HRQOL instruments were evaluated: Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-Short Form, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Four lessons learned from the project are discussed: the importance of good developmental item banks, the ambiguity of model fit results, the limits of our knowledge regarding the practical implications of model misfit, and the importance in the measurement of HRQOL of construct definition. With respect to these lessons, areas for future research are suggested. The feasibility of developing item banks for broad definitions of health is discussed.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.