nach oben

Erschienen in:

24.06.2016

The e-MSWS-12: improving the multiple sclerosis walking scale using item response theory

verfasst von: Matthew M. Engelhard, Karen M. Schmidt, Casey E. Engel, J. Nicholas Brenton, Stephen D. Patek, Myla D. Goldman

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 12/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale (MSWS-12) is the predominant patient-reported measure of multiple sclerosis (MS) -elated walking ability, yet it had not been analyzed using item response theory (IRT), the emerging standard for patient-reported outcome (PRO) validation. This study aims to reduce MSWS-12 measurement error and facilitate computerized adaptive testing by creating an IRT model of the MSWS-12 and distributing it online.

Methods

MSWS-12 responses from 284 subjects with MS were collected by mail and used to fit and compare several IRT models. Following model selection and assessment, subpopulations based on age and sex were tested for differential item functioning (DIF).

Results

Model comparison favored a one-dimensional graded response model (GRM). This model met fit criteria and explained 87 % of response variance. The performance of each MSWS-12 item was characterized using category response curves (CRCs) and item information. IRT-based MSWS-12 scores correlated with traditional MSWS-12 scores (r = 0.99) and timed 25-foot walk (T25FW) speed (r = −0.70). Item 2 showed DIF based on age (χ ² = 19.02, df = 5, p < 0.01), and Item 11 showed DIF based on sex (χ ² = 13.76, df = 5, p = 0.02).

Conclusions

MSWS-12 measurement error depends on walking ability, but could be lowered by improving or replacing items with low information or DIF. The e-MSWS-12 includes IRT-based scoring, error checking, and an estimated T25FW derived from MSWS-12 responses. It is available at https://ms-irt.shinyapps.io/e-MSWS-12.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

LaRocca, D. N. G. (2012). Impact of walking impairment in multiple sclerosis. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 4(3), 189–201. doi:10.2165/11591150-000000000-00000.CrossRef

Sutliff, M. H. (2010). Contribution of impaired mobility to patient burden in multiple sclerosis. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 26(1), 109–119. doi:10.1185/03007990903433528.CrossRefPubMed

Hobart, J. C., Riazi, A., Lamping, D. L., Fitzpatrick, R., & Thompson, A. J. (2003). Measuring the impact of MS on walking ability the 12-item MS Walking Scale (MSWS-12). Neurology, 60(1), 31–36. doi:10.1212/WNL.60.1.31.CrossRefPubMed

Kieseier, B. C., & Pozzilli, C. (2012). Assessing walking disability in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 18(7), 914–924. doi:10.1177/1352458512444498.CrossRefPubMed

Goodman, A. D., Brown, T. R., Cohen, J. A., Krupp, L. B., Schapiro, R., Schwid, S. R., & Fampridine MS-F202 Study Group. (2008). Dose comparison trial of sustained-release fampridine in multiple sclerosis. Neurology, 71(15), 1134–1141. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000326213.89576.0e.CrossRefPubMed

Goodman, A. D., Brown, T. R., Krupp, L. B., Schapiro, R. T., Schwid, S. R., Cohen, R., & Blight, A. R. (2009). Sustained-release oral fampridine in multiple sclerosis: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. The Lancet, 373(9665), 732–738. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60442-6.CrossRef

McGuigan, C., & Hutchinson, M. (2004). Confirming the validity and responsiveness of the Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12). Neurology, 62(11), 2103–2105. doi:10.1212/01.WNL.0000127604.84575.0D.CrossRefPubMed

Motl, R. W., & Snook, E. M. (2008). Confirmation and extension of the validity of the Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12). Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 268(1–2), 69–73. doi:10.1016/j.jns.2007.11.003.CrossRefPubMed

Tyson, S., & Connell, L. (2009). The psychometric properties and clinical utility of measures of walking and mobility in neurological conditions: A systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation, 23(11), 1018–1033. doi:10.1177/0269215509339004.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Hobart, J., Blight, A. R., Goodman, A., Lynn, F., & Putzki, N. (2013). Timed 25-foot walk direct evidence that improving 20 % or greater is clinically meaningful in MS. Neurology, 80(16), 1509–1517. doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e31828cf7f3.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Motl, R. W., Learmonth, Y. C., Pilutti, L. A., Dlugonski, D., & Klaren, R. (2014). Validity of minimal clinically important difference values for the multiple sclerosis walking scale-12? European Neurology, 71(3–4), 196–202. doi:10.1159/000356116.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Learmonth, Y. C., Dlugonski, D. D., Pilutti, L. A., Sandroff, B. M., & Motl, R. W. (2013). The reliability, precision and clinically meaningful change of walking assessments in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 19(13), 1784–1791. doi:10.1177/1352458513483890.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Ayala, R. J. D. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York: Guilford Press.

14.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: L. Erlbaum Associates.

15.

Chang, C.-H., & Reeve, B. B. (2005). Item response theory and its applications to patient-reported outcomes measurement. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 28(3), 264–282. doi:10.1177/0163278705278275.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Cano, S. J., Barrett, L. E., Zajicek, J. P., & Hobart, J. C. (2011). Beyond the reach of traditional analyses: Using Rasch to evaluate the DASH in people with multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 17(2), 214–222. doi:10.1177/1352458510385269.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Mills, R. J., Young, C. A., Pallant, J. F., & Tennant, A. (2010). Rasch analysis of the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) in multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 81(9), 1049–1051. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2008.151340.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Velozo, C. A., Wang, Y., Lehman, L., & Wang, J.-H. (2008). Utilizing Rasch measurement models to develop a computer adaptive self-report of walking, climbing, and running. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30(6), 458–467. doi:10.1080/09638280701617317.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Michel, P., Auquier, P., Baumstarck, K., Pelletier, J., Loundou, A., Ghattas, B., & Boyer, L. (2015). Development of a cross-cultural item bank for measuring quality of life related to mental health in multiple sclerosis patients. Quality of Life Research, 24(9), 2261–2271. doi:10.1007/s11136-015-0948-0.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Michel, P., Baumstarck, K., Ghattas, B., Pelletier, J., Loundou, A., Boucekine, M., & Boyer, L. (2016). A multidimensional computerized adaptive short-form quality of life questionnaire developed and validated for multiple sclerosis: The MusiQoL-MCAT. Medicine, 95(14), e3068. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003068.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., & Rose, M. (2007). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S3–S11. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Polman, C. H., Reingold, S. C., Banwell, B., Clanet, M., Cohen, J. A., Filippi, M., & Wolinsky, J. S. (2011). Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria. Annals of Neurology, 69(2), 292–302. doi:10.1002/ana.22366.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/.

24.

Revelle, W. (2015). Psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.

25.

Lee, S.-Y., Poon, W.-Y., & Bentler, P. M. (1990). A three-stage estimation procedure for structural equation models with polytomous variables. Psychometrika, 55(1), 45–51. doi:10.1007/BF02294742.CrossRef

26.

Masters, G. N. (1982). A rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149–174. doi:10.1007/BF02296272.CrossRef

27.

Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, 34(4, Pt. 2), 100.

28.

Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an Em algorithm. ETS Research Report Series, 1992(1), i-30. doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.1992.tb01436.x.

29.

Chalmers, R. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29.CrossRef

30.

Drasgow, F., Levine, M. V., & Williams, E. A. (1985). Appropriateness measurement with polychotomous item response models and standardized indices. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38(1), 67–86. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00817.x.CrossRef

31.

Kang, T., & Chen, T. T. (2007). An investigation of the performance of the generalized S–X ² item-fit index for polytomous IRT models. ACT research report series, 2007–1. ACT, Inc. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED510479.

32.

Kim, S.-H., & Cohen, A. S. (1998). Detection of differential item functioning under the graded response model with the likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22(4), 345–355. doi:10.1177/014662169802200403.CrossRef

33.

Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 50–64. doi:10.1177/01466216000241003.CrossRef

34.

Cavanaugh, J. T., Gappmaier, V. O., Dibble, L. E., & Gappmaier, E. (2011). Ambulatory activity in individuals with multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 35(1), 26–33. doi:10.1097/NPT.0b013e3182097190.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Harwell, M. R., & Janosky, J. E. (1991). An empirical study of the effects of small datasets and varying prior variances on item parameter estimation in BILOG. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15(3), 279–291. doi:10.1177/014662169101500308.CrossRef

36.

Orlando, M., & Marshall, G. N. (2002). Differential item functioning in a Spanish translation of the PTSD checklist: Detection and evaluation of impact. Psychological Assessment, 14(1), 50–59. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.14.1.50.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Champlain, A. F. D., Gessaroli, M. E., Tang, K. L., & Champlain, J. E. D. (1999). Assessing the dimensionality of polytomous item responses with small sample sizes and short test lengths: A comparison of procedures. ResearchGate. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234601707_Assessing_the_Dimensionality_of_Polytomous_Item_Responses_with_Small_Sample_Sizes_and_Short_Test_Lengths_A_Comparison_of_Procedures.

38.

Hulin, C. L., Lissak, R. I., & Drasgow, F. (1982). Recovery of two- and three-parameter logistic item characteristic curves: A Monte Carlo study. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6(3), 249–260. doi:10.1177/014662168200600301.CrossRef

39.

Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (1982). Some standard errors in item response theory. Psychometrika, 47(4), 397–412. doi:10.1007/BF02293705.CrossRef

Titel: The e-MSWS-12: improving the multiple sclerosis walking scale using item response theory
verfasst von: Matthew M. Engelhard
Karen M. Schmidt
Casey E. Engel
J. Nicholas Brenton
Stephen D. Patek
Myla D. Goldman
Publikationsdatum: 24.06.2016
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 12/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1342-2

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2016

QOL and sociodemographic factors among first-time parents in Japan: a multilevel analysis

EQ-5D-derived health utilities and minimally important differences for chronic health conditions: 2011 Commonwealth Fund Survey of Sicker Adults in Canada

Objective drivers of subjective well-being in geriatric inpatients: mobility function and level of education are general predictors of self-evaluated health, feeling of loneliness, and severity of depression symptoms

Quality-of-life assessment in dementia: the use of DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy total scores

Interpretation of verbal descriptors for response options commonly used in verbal rating scales in patient-reported outcome instruments

Associations between daily physical activity, handgrip strength, muscle mass, physical performance and quality of life in prefrail and frail community-dwelling older adults