Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Neurology 1/2021

01-12-2021 | Central Nervous System Trauma | Research

Rasch analysis of the Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST) in mild traumatic brain injury

Authors: Nusratnaaz Shaikh, Alice Theadom, Richard Siegert, Natalie Hardaker, Doug King, Patria Hume

Published in: BMC Neurology | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST) symptom scale in a sample of people with a mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) through Rasch analysis, and to obtain an interval level measurement score for potential clinical use.

Materials and methods

Data were obtained from 114 adults aged over 16 years, who had experienced at least one mTBI in the past 10 years. Participants were recruited via social media, concussion clinics and sports organisations over a 4-month period between May and September 2020. Participants were asked to compete the symptom scale of the BIST tool via an anonymous online questionnaire. Internal construct validity, dimensionality, person separation index, and differential item functioning of the BIST were examined with Rasch analysis.

Results

BIST in its original form produced a satisfactory item-trait interaction, and good reliability, but was found to be multi-dimensional. Rasch analysis of the full scale with three domains as subtests resulted in acceptable model fit (χ2(6) =3.8, p >  0.05), with good reliability (Person Separation Index = 0.84), and uni-dimensionality. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis displayed no significant DIF effects for sex or age revealing that people responded consistently and similarly to the individual BIST items based on severity of symptom burden.

Conclusions

The 15-item symptom scale of the BIST tool is a psychometrically sound measure of symptom burden following mTBI. The findings provide support for use of both total and sub scale scores for clinical use. Ordinal to interval score conversions are recommended for use when using the scores for research purposes in mTBI.
Literature
1.
go back to reference James, S. and E. al., Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. Lancet Neurology, 2019 18(1): p. 56–87. James, S. and E. al., Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. Lancet Neurology, 2019 18(1): p. 56–87.
2.
go back to reference McMahon P, et al. Symptomatology and functional outcome in mild traumatic brain injury: results from the prospective TRACK-TBI study. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31(1):26–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral McMahon P, et al. Symptomatology and functional outcome in mild traumatic brain injury: results from the prospective TRACK-TBI study. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31(1):26–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Theadom, A., et al., Population-based cohort study of the impacts of mild traumatic brain injury in adults four years post-injury. PloS One, 2018.CrossRef Theadom, A., et al., Population-based cohort study of the impacts of mild traumatic brain injury in adults four years post-injury. PloS One, 2018.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Lee Y, et al. Increased risk of ischemic stroke in patients with mild traumatic brain injury: a nationwide cohort study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2014:22(66). Lee Y, et al. Increased risk of ischemic stroke in patients with mild traumatic brain injury: a nationwide cohort study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2014:22(66).
5.
go back to reference Nordstrom A, Nordstrom P. Traumatic brain injury and the risk of dementia diagnosis: a nationwide cohort study. PLoS Med. 2018. Nordstrom A, Nordstrom P. Traumatic brain injury and the risk of dementia diagnosis: a nationwide cohort study. PLoS Med. 2018.
6.
go back to reference Cnossen, M.C., et al., Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study. PloSOne, 2016. Aug 29. Cnossen, M.C., et al., Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study. PloSOne, 2016. Aug 29.
7.
go back to reference Theadom A, et al. Does sub-classifying mild traumatic brain injuries help to identify people who go on to experience long-term symptoms? Brain Impairment. 2017:1–14. Theadom A, et al. Does sub-classifying mild traumatic brain injuries help to identify people who go on to experience long-term symptoms? Brain Impairment. 2017:1–14.
8.
go back to reference Lingsma, H., et al., Outcome Prediction After Mild and Complicated Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: External Validation of Existing Models and Identification of New Predictors Using the TRACK-TBI Pilot Study. Journal of Neurotrauma, 2014. Lingsma, H., et al., Outcome Prediction After Mild and Complicated Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: External Validation of Existing Models and Identification of New Predictors Using the TRACK-TBI Pilot Study. Journal of Neurotrauma, 2014.
9.
go back to reference Theadom A, et al. Persistent problems 1 year after mild traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal population study in New Zealand. Br J Gen Pract. 2016;66(642):e16–23.CrossRefPubMed Theadom A, et al. Persistent problems 1 year after mild traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal population study in New Zealand. Br J Gen Pract. 2016;66(642):e16–23.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Forrest RHJ, et al. Mild traumatic brain injury in New Zealand: factors influencing post-concussion symptom recovery time in a specialised concussion service. J Primary Health Care. 2018;10(2):159–66.CrossRef Forrest RHJ, et al. Mild traumatic brain injury in New Zealand: factors influencing post-concussion symptom recovery time in a specialised concussion service. J Primary Health Care. 2018;10(2):159–66.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Echemendia RJ, et al. The sport concussion assessment tool 5th edition (SCAT5): background and rationale. British J Sports Med. 2017;51:848–50.CrossRef Echemendia RJ, et al. The sport concussion assessment tool 5th edition (SCAT5): background and rationale. British J Sports Med. 2017;51:848–50.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Feigin VF, et al. Incidence of traumatic brain injury in New Zealand: a population-based study. Lancet Neurology. 2013;12(1):53–64.CrossRefPubMed Feigin VF, et al. Incidence of traumatic brain injury in New Zealand: a population-based study. Lancet Neurology. 2013;12(1):53–64.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference King NS, et al. The Rivermead post concussion symptoms questionnaire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability. J Neurol. 1995;242(9):587–92.CrossRefPubMed King NS, et al. The Rivermead post concussion symptoms questionnaire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability. J Neurol. 1995;242(9):587–92.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Thomas M, et al. The structure of the rivermead post-concussion symptoms questionnaire in Australian adults with traumatic brain injury. Brain Impairment. 2018;19(2):166–82.CrossRef Thomas M, et al. The structure of the rivermead post-concussion symptoms questionnaire in Australian adults with traumatic brain injury. Brain Impairment. 2018;19(2):166–82.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Potter S, et al. The Rivermead post concussion symptoms questionnaire: a confirmatory factor analysis. J Neurol. 2006;253(12):1603–14.CrossRefPubMed Potter S, et al. The Rivermead post concussion symptoms questionnaire: a confirmatory factor analysis. J Neurol. 2006;253(12):1603–14.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Theadom A. et al. Tool development, factor structure and validity. PloS one: The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST); 2021. Theadom A. et al. Tool development, factor structure and validity. PloS one: The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST); 2021.
17.
go back to reference Linacre JM. Sample size and item claibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions. 1994;7(4):328. Linacre JM. Sample size and item claibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions. 1994;7(4):328.
18.
go back to reference Andrich D, et al. RUMM 2030. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2012. Andrich D, et al. RUMM 2030. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2012.
19.
go back to reference 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 Care & Research. 2007;57(8):1358–62.CrossRef 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 Care & Research. 2007;57(8):1358–62.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Thissen D, Steinberg L, Wainer H. Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models; 1993. Thissen D, Steinberg L, Wainer H. Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models; 1993.
21.
go back to reference Nilsson ÅL, Tennant A. Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: the functional Independence measure (FIMTM) revisited. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(10):884–92.CrossRef Nilsson ÅL, Tennant A. Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: the functional Independence measure (FIMTM) revisited. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(10):884–92.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Smith EV Jr. Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Meas. 2002;3(2):205–31.PubMed Smith EV Jr. Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Meas. 2002;3(2):205–31.PubMed
23.
go back to reference Tennant A, Pallant J. Unidimensionality matters! (a tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions. 2006;20(1):1048–51. Tennant A, Pallant J. Unidimensionality matters! (a tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions. 2006;20(1):1048–51.
24.
go back to reference Marais I, Andrich D. Formalizing dimension and response violations of local independence in the unidimensional Rasch model. J Appl Meas. 2008;9(3):200–15.PubMed Marais I, Andrich D. Formalizing dimension and response violations of local independence in the unidimensional Rasch model. J Appl Meas. 2008;9(3):200–15.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Reid, D., et al., Knowledge and attitudes (KA) surveys on concussion in sports: Doctors September 2017 survey. 2018, Report# 4 to Accident Compensation Corporation. Reid, D., et al., Knowledge and attitudes (KA) surveys on concussion in sports: Doctors September 2017 survey. 2018, Report# 4 to Accident Compensation Corporation.
26.
go back to reference Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2015: Oxford University press. USA. . Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2015: Oxford University press. USA. .
27.
go back to reference McGeown J, et al. Predicting sports-related mTBI symptom resolution trajectory using initial clinical assessment findings: a retrospective study. Sports Med. 2020;50(6):1191–202.CrossRefPubMed McGeown J, et al. Predicting sports-related mTBI symptom resolution trajectory using initial clinical assessment findings: a retrospective study. Sports Med. 2020;50(6):1191–202.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Rasch analysis of the Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST) in mild traumatic brain injury
Authors
Nusratnaaz Shaikh
Alice Theadom
Richard Siegert
Natalie Hardaker
Doug King
Patria Hume
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Neurology / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2377
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02410-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

BMC Neurology 1/2021 Go to the issue