Modern Psychometric Methods for Estimating Physician Performance on the Clinician and Group CAHPS® Survey

Published in: Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, v. 13, no. 2-4, Dec. 2013, p. 109-123

Posted on on December 01, 2013

by Shubhabrata Mukherjee, Hector Rodriguez, Marc N. Elliott, Paul K. Crane

Read More

Access further information on this document at Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology

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

Modern psychometric methods for scoring the Clinician & Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS®) instrument can improve the precision of patient scores. The extent to which these methods can improve the reliable estimation and comparison of individual physician performance, however, remains unclear. Using CG-CAHPS® data from 12,244 unique patients of 448 primary care physicians in southern California, four methods were used to calculate composite scores: (1) standard scoring, (2) a single factor confirmatory factor analysis model, (3) a bifactor model, and (4) a correlated factor model. We extracted factor scores for physicians from each model and adjusted the scores for respondent characteristics, including age, education, self-rated physical health, and race/ethnicity. Physician-level reliability and physician rankings were examined across the four methods. The bifactor and correlated factor models achieved the best fit for the core CG-CAHPS® questions from the three core composite measures. Compared to standard adjusted scoring, the bifactor model scores resulted in a 25 % reduction in required sample sizes per physician. The correlation of physician rankings between scoring methods ranged from 0.58 to 0.86. The discordance of physician rankings across scoring methods was most pronounced in the middle of the performance distribution. Using modern psychometric methods to score physician performance on the core CG-CAHPS® questions may improve the reliability of physician performance estimates on patient experience measures, thereby reducing the required respondent sample sizes per physician compared to standard scoring. To assess the predictive validity of the CG-CAHPS® scores generated by modern psychometric methods, future research should examine the relative association of different scoring methods and important patient-centered outcomes of care.

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.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

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.