Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Measurement of change in health status with Rasch models

Authors: Pasquale Anselmi, Giulio Vidotto, Ornella Bettinardi, Giorgio Bertolotti

Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The traditional approach to the measurement of change presents important drawbacks (no information at individual level, ordinal scores, variance of the measurement instrument across time points), which Rasch models overcome. The article aims to illustrate the features of the measurement of change with Rasch models.

Methods

To illustrate the measurement of change using Rasch models, the quantitative data of a longitudinal study of heart-surgery patients (N = 98) were used. The scale “Perception of Positive Change” was used as an example of measurement instrument. All patients underwent cardiac rehabilitation, individual psychological intervention, and educational intervention. Nineteen patients also attended progressive muscle relaxation group trainings. The scale was administered before and after the interventions. Three Rasch approaches were used. Two separate analyses were run on the data from the two time points to test the invariance of the instrument. An analysis was run on the stacked data from both time points to measure change in a common frame of reference. Results of the latter analysis were compared with those of an analysis that removed the influence of local dependency on patient measures. Statistics t, χ2 and F were used for comparing the patient and item measures estimated in the Rasch analyses (a-priori α = .05). Infit, Outfit, R and item Strata were used for investigating Rasch model fit, reliability, and validity of the instrument.

Results

Data of all 98 patients were included in the analyses. The instrument was reliable, valid, and substantively unidimensional (Infit, Outfit < 2 for all items, R = .84, item Strata range = 3.93-6.07). Changes in the functioning of the instrument occurred across the two time, which prevented the use of the two separate analyses to unambiguously measure change. Local dependency had a negligible effect on patient measures (p ≥ .8674). Thirteen patients improved, whereas 3 worsened. The patients who attended the relaxation group trainings did not report greater improvement than those who did not (p = .1007).

Conclusions

Rasch models represent a valid framework for the measurement of change and a useful complement to traditional approaches.
Literature
1.
Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:459–68.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Beaton DE, Hogg-Johnson S, Bombardier C. Evaluating changes in health status: reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:79–93.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Erlbaum; 1988.
4.
Fischer GH. The precision of gain scores under an item response theory perspective: a comparison of asymptotic and exact conditional inference about change. Appl Psych Meas. 2003;27:3–26.CrossRef
5.
Kahler E, Rogausch A, Brunner E, Himmel W. A parametric analysis of ordinal quality-of-life data can lead to erroneous results. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:475–80.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Wright BD. Comparisons require stability. Rasch Meas Trans. 1996;10:506.
7.
Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment test. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research; 1960. Reprinted. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1980.
8.
Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1988.
9.
Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2001.
10.
Anselmi P, Vianello M, Voci A, Robusto E. Implicit sexual attitude of heterosexual, gay and bisexual individuals: disentangling the contribution of specific associations to the overall measure. Plos One. 2013;8:e78990.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
11.
Anselmi P, Vianello M, Robusto E. Preferring thin people does not imply derogating fat people. A Rasch analysis of the implicit weight attitude. Obesity. 2013;21:261–5.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Fisher AG. The assessment of IADL motor skills: an application of many-facet Rasch analysis. Am J Occup Ther. 1993;47:319–29.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Haley SM, McHorney CA, Ware Jr JE. Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10): I. unidimensionality and reproducibility of the Rasch item scale. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:671–84.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Heinemann AW, Linacre JM, Wright BD, Hamilton BB, Granger C. Relationships between impairment and physical disability as measured by the functional independence measure. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1993;74:566–73.CrossRef
15.
Heinemann AW, Linacre JM, Wright BD, Hamilton BB, Granger C. Prediction of rehabilitation outcomes with disability measures. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1994;75:133–43.CrossRef
16.
Ludlow LH, Haley SM, Gans BM. A hierarchical model of functional performance in rehabilitation medicine: the Tufts assessment of motor performance. Eval Health Prof. 1992;15:59–74.CrossRef
17.
Michielin P, Vidotto G, Altoè G, Colombari M, Sartori L, Bertolotti G, et al. Proposta di un nuovo strumento per la verifica dell'efficacia nella pratica dei trattamenti psicologici e psicoterapeutici. G Ital Med Lav Ergon. 2008;30(Suppl 1A):98–104.
18.
Bettinardi O, Vidotto G, Moroni L, Pedretti RFE, Maini M, Rosi A, et al. Measuring change in rehabilitative cardiology: reliability of a short questionnaire to assess an outcome. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 2012;78:97–104.PubMed
19.
Giannuzzi P. National guideline in rehabilitation cardiology and secondary prevention in cardiovascular diseases. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 2006;66:81–116.
20.
Graham I, Atar D, Borch-Johnsen K, Boysen G, Burell G, Cifkova R, et al. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease preventionion clinical practice: full text. Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts). Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2007;14 Suppl 2:1–113.CrossRef
21.
Jacobson E. Progressive relaxation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1938.
22.
Fair PL. Biofeedback-assisted relaxation strategies in psychotherapy. In: Basmajian JV, editor. Biofeedback: principles and practice for clinicians. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1983.
23.
Andrich D. A rating scale formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika. 1978;43:561–73.CrossRef
24.
Masters GN. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika. 1982;47:149–74.CrossRef
25.
Mallinson T. Rasch analysis of repeated measures. Rasch Meas Trans. 2011;251:1317.
26.
Wright BD. Rack and stack: time 1 vs. time 2 or pre-test vs. post-test. Rasch Meas Trans. 2003;17:905–6.
27.
Chien TW. Repeated measure designs (time series) and Rasch. Rasch Meas Trans. 2008;22:1171.
28.
Linacre JM. Facets Rasch measurement computer program [computer program]. Version 3.66.0. Chicago: Winsteps.com; 2009.
29.
Fisher RA. Statistical methods for research workers. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd; 1932.
30.
Linacre JM. What do Infit and Outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Meas Trans. 2002;16:878.
31.
Smith Jr EV. Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation:a Rasch measurement perspective. J Appl Meas. 2001;2:281–311.PubMed
32.
Messick S. Validity. In: Linn RL, editor. Educational measurement. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1989. p. 13–103.
33.
Fisher Jr W. Reliability, separation, strata statistics. Rasch Meas Trans. 1992;6:238.
34.
Linacre JM. Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. J Appl Meas. 2002;3:85–106.PubMed
35.
Andrich D. Controversy and the Rasch model: a characteristic of incompatible paradigms? Med Care. 2004;42 Suppl 1:7–16.
36.
Tuley MR, Mulrow CD, McMahan CA. Estimating and testing an index of responsiveness and the relationship of the index to power. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:417–21.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Wright JG, Young NL. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:239–46.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Cristante F, Robusto E. Assessing change with the extended logistic model. Brit J Math Stat Psychol. 2007;60:367–75.CrossRef
39.
Fischer GH, Parzer P. An extension of the rating scale model with an application to the measurement of change. Psychometrika. 1991;56:637–51.CrossRef
40.
Fischer GH, Ponocny I. An extension of the partial credit model with an application to the measurement of change. Psychometrika. 1994;59:177–92.CrossRef
41.
Miceli R, Settanni M, Vidotto G. Measuring change in training programs: an empirical illustration. Psychol Sci Quart. 2008;50:433–47.
42.
Robusto E, Cristante F, Vianello M. Assessing the impact of replication on implicit association test effect by means of the extended logistic model for the assessment of change. Behav Res Methods. 2008;40:954–60.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Measurement of change in health status with Rasch models
Authors
Pasquale Anselmi
Giulio Vidotto
Ornella Bettinardi
Giorgio Bertolotti
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7525
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0197-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research

Health-related quality of life from the perspective of children with severe specific language impairment

Research article

Dutch translation and cross-cultural validation of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT)

Research

“Married with children” the influence of significant others in TTO exercises

Research

Oral health-related quality of life before and after crown therapy in young patients with amelogenesis imperfecta

Research

Validation of a French-language version of the health education impact Questionnaire (heiQ) among chronic disease patients seen in primary care: a cross-sectional study

Research

Reliability and validity of a new HIV-specific questionnaire with adults living with HIV in Canada and Ireland: the HIV Disability Questionnaire (HDQ)