Abstract

BackgroundComparisons of population health status using self-report measures such as the SF-36 rest on the assumption that the measured items have a common interpretation across sub-groups. However, self-report measures may be sensitive to differential item functioning (DIF), which occurs when sub-groups with the same underlying health status have a different probability of item response. This study tested for DIF on the SF-36 physical functioning (PF) and mental health (MH) sub-scales in population-based data using latent variable mixture models (LVMMs).MethodsData were from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos), a prospective national cohort study. LVMMs were applied to the ten PF and five MH SF-36 items. A standard two-parameter graded response model with one latent class was compared to multi-class LVMMs. Multivariable logistic regression models with pseudo-class random draws characterized the latent classes on demographic and health variables.ResultsThe CaMos cohort consisted of 9423 respondents. A three-class LVMM fit the PF sub-scale, with class proportions of 0.59, 0.24, and 0.17. For the MH sub-scale, a two-class model fit the data, with class proportions of 0.69 and 0.31. For PF items, the probabilities of reporting greater limitations were consistently higher in classes 2 and 3 than class 1. For MH items, respondents in class 2 reported more health problems than in class 1. Differences in item thresholds and factor loadings between one-class and multi-class models were observed for both sub-scales. Demographic and health variables were associated with class membership.ConclusionsThis study revealed DIF in population-based SF-36 data; the results suggest that PF and MH sub-scale scores may not be comparable across sub-groups defined by demographic and health status variables, although effects were frequently small to moderate in size. Evaluation of DIF should be a routine step when analysing population-based self-report data to ensure valid comparisons amongst sub-groups.

Highlights

  • Comparisons of population health status using self-report measures such as the SF-36 rest on the assumption that the measured items have a common interpretation across sub-groups

  • That previous study found that the first latent class contained more people with no limitations in physical functioning (PF) than the other two classes, and that sex, age and health status were associated with latent class membership

  • The latent variable mixture models (LVMMs) was a useful tool to define sub-groups of individuals with similar item response patterns and investigate characteristics potentially associated with group member

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Comparisons of population health status using self-report measures such as the SF-36 rest on the assumption that the measured items have a common interpretation across sub-groups. Self-report measures may be sensitive to differential item functioning (DIF), which occurs when sub-groups with the same underlying health status have a different probability of item response. Self-report health status measures, such as the SF-36, are frequently used to compare the health and wellbeing of different populations and to establish population norms for comparative investigations [1]. While many PROMS have been subjected to recommended psychometric evaluations of their construct validity, test-retest reliability, and interpretability [2,3,4], they are less frequently evaluated for differential item functioning (DIF), a form of measurement nonequivalence. When there is evidence of DIF, differences on the PROM items may be an artifact of the measurement process

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.