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

Differential item functioning (DIF) of SF-12 and Q-LES-Q-SF items among french substance users

Authors: Stéphanie Bourion-Bédès, Raymund Schwan, Vincent Laprevote, Alex Bédès, Jean-Louis Bonnet, Cédric Baumann

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

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Differential Item Functioning (DIF) is investigated to ensure that each item displays a consistent pattern of responses irrespective of the characteristics of the respondents. Assessing DIF helps to understand the nature of instruments, to assess the quality of a measure and to interpret results. This study aimed to examine whether the items of the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) and Short-Form 12 (SF-12) exhibit DIF.

Method

A total of 124 outpatients diagnosed with substance dependence participated in a cross-sectional, multicenter study. In addition to the Q-LES-Q-SF and SF-12 results, demographic data such as age, sex, type of substance dependence and education level were collected. Rasch analysis was conducted (using RUMM2020 software) to assess DIF of the Q-LES-Q-SF and SF-12 items.

Results

For SF-12, significant age-related uniform DIF was found in two of the 12 items, and sex-related DIF was found in one of the 12 items. All of the observed DIF effects in SF-12 were found among the mental health items. Three items showed DIF on the Q-LES-Q-SF; however, the impact of DIF item on the delta score calculation for the comparisons of self-reported health status between the groups was minimal in the SF-12 and small in the Q-LES-Q-SF.

Conclusion

These results indicated that no major measurement bias affects the validity of the self-reported health status assessed using the Q-LES-Q-SF or SF-12. Thus, these questionnaires are largely robust measures of self-reported health status among substance users.
Literature
1.
De Maeyer J, Vanderplasschen W, Broekaert E. Quality of life among opiate-dependent individuals: A review of the literature. Int J Drug Policy. 2010;21:364–80.CrossRefPubMed
2.
De Maeyer J, Vanderplasschen W, Lammertyn J, Van Nieuwenhuizen C, Sabbe B, Broekaert E. Current quality of life and its determinants among opiate-dependent individuals five years after starting methadone treatment. Qual Life Res. 2011;20:139–50.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
3.
Lahmek P, Berlin I, Michel L, Berghout C, Meunier N, Aubin J. Determinants of improvement in quality of life of alcohol-dependent patients during an impatient withdrawal programme. Int J Med Sci. 2009;6(4):160–7.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
4.
Desouky TF, Mora PA, Howell EA. Measurement invariance of the SF-12 across European-American, Latina, and African-American postpartum women. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1135–44.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Langer MM, Hill CD, Thissen D, Burwinckle TM, Varni JW, DeWalt DA. Item response theory detected differential item functioning between healthy and ill children in quality-of-life measures. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:268–76.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Bjorner JB, Kreiner S, Ware J, Damsgaard MT, Bech P. Differential item functioning in the Danish translation of the SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1189–202.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zumbo BD. Three generations of DIF Analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Lang Assess Q. 2007;4(2):223–33.CrossRef
8.
Millsap RE, Everson HT. Methodology review: statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. App Psych Meas. 1993;17:297.CrossRef
9.
Camilli G, Sherpherd LA. Methods for identifying Biased Test items. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1994.
10.
Perkins AJ, Stump TE, Monahan PO, McHorney CA. Assessment of differential item functioning for demographic comparisons in the MOS SF36 health Survey. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:331–45.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Steinberg L, Thissen D. Using effect sizes for research reporting: examples using item response theory to analyze differential item functioning. Psychol Methods. 2006;11:402–15.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Mick E, Faraone S, Spencer T, Zhang H, Biederman J. Assessing the validity of the quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire-short form in adults with ADHD. J Atten Disord. 2008;11:504–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Wyrwich K, Harnam N, Revicki A, Locklear J, Svedsater H, Endicott J. Assessment of quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire-short form responder thresholds in generalized anxiety disorder and bipolar disorder studies. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2011;26(3):121–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Bourion-Bédès S, Schwan R, Epstein J, Laprevote V, Bédès A, Bonnet JL, et al. Combination of classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT) analysis to study the psychometric properties of the french version of the quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire-short form (Q-LES-Q-SF). Qual Life Res. 2015;24(2):287–93.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Cameron IM, Scott NW, Adler M, Reid IC. A comparison of three methods of assessing differential item functioning (DIF) in the hospital anxiety depression scale: ordinal logistic regression, rasch analysis and the mantel chi-square procedure. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:2883–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th edition, Text revision. Washington: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.CrossRef
17.
Endicott J, Nee J, Harrisson W, Blumenthal R. Quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire : a new measure. Psychopharmacol Bull. 1993;29:321–6.PubMed
18.
Gandek B, Ware J, Aaronson N, Apolone G, Bjorner J, Brazier J, et al. Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 health survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA project. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1171–8.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Muller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol Res Online. 2003;8(2):23–74.
20.
Yu CY. Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Los Angeles: University of California; 2002.
21.
Salvers MP, Bosworth HB, Swanson JW. Reliability and validity of the SF-12 health survey among people with severe mental illness. Med Care. 2000;11:1141–50.CrossRef
22.
Inchausti F, Mole J, Fonseca-Pedrero E, Ortuño-Sierra J. Validity of personality measurement in adults with anxiety disorders: psychometric properties of the Spanish NEO-FFI-R using Rasch analyses. Front Psychol. 2015;6:465.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
23.
Pallant JF, Tennant A. An introduction to the rasch measurement model: an example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Br J Clin Psychol. 2007;46:1–18.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied and what one should look for in a Rasch paper. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1358–62.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hagquist C, Bruce M, Gustavsson JP. Using the Rasch model in nursing research: an introduction and illustrative example. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(3):380–93.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Linacre JM. What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Transactions. 2002;16(2):878.
27.
Zucca A, Lambert SD, Boyes AW, Pallant JF. Rasch analysis of the Mini-Mental Adjustment to Cancer Scale (mini-MAC) among a heterogeneous sample of long-term cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:55.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
28.
Tennant A, Pallant JF. DIF matters: a practical approach to test if Differential Item Functioning makes a difference. Rasch measurement transactions. 2007;20:1082–4.
29.
Fleishman JA, Lawrence WF. Demographic variation in SF-12 scores: True differences or differential item functioning. Med Care. 2003;41(7 Suppl):III75–86.PubMed
30.
Goetz C, Ecosse E, Rat AC, Pouchot J, Coste J, Guillemin F. Measurement properties of the osteoarthritis of knee and hip quality of life OAKHQOL questionnaire: an item response theory analysis. Rheumatology. 2011;50:500–5.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Otero-Rodríguez A, León-Muñoz LM, Balboa-Castillo T, Banegas JR, Rodríguez-Artalejo F, Guallar-Castillón P. Change in health-related quality of life as a predictor of mortality in the older adults. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:15–23.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. Manual and interpretation guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center ed; 1993. SF- 36 Health survey.
33.
Meade AW. A taxonomy of effect size measures for the differential functioning of items and scales. J Appl Psychol. 2010;95(4):728–43.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Rouquette A, Hardouin JB, Coste J. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) ans subsequent bias in group comparisons using a composite measurement scale: a simulation study. J Appl Measurement. 2015. 17(3). in press.
Metadata
Title
Differential item functioning (DIF) of SF-12 and Q-LES-Q-SF items among french substance users
Authors
Stéphanie Bourion-Bédès
Raymund Schwan
Vincent Laprevote
Alex Bédès
Jean-Louis Bonnet
Cédric Baumann
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/s12955-015-0365-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

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

Research

The reciprocal effect of pain catastrophizing and satisfaction with participation in the multidisciplinary treatment of patients with chronic back pain

Research

Do chronic disease patients value generic health states differently from individuals with no chronic disease? A case of a multicultural Asian population

Research

A psychometric assessment of the St. George’s respiratory questionnaire in patients with COPD using rasch model analysis

Research

Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors (QLACS) questionnaire: application in a sample of short-term survivors

Research

Sexual dysfunction and sexual quality of life among the physically challenged in the Kumasi metropolis, Ghana

Short Report

Cross-cultural measurement equivalence of the 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Singapore