Comparing Disability Levels for Community-dwelling Adults in the United States and the Republic of Korea using the Rasch Model.

Journal of applied measurement Pub Date : 2018-01-01
Ickpyo Hong, Annie N Simpson, Kit N Simpson, Sandra S Brotherton, Craig A Velozo
{"title":"Comparing Disability Levels for Community-dwelling Adults in the United States and the Republic of Korea using the Rasch Model.","authors":"Ickpyo Hong,&nbsp;Annie N Simpson,&nbsp;Kit N Simpson,&nbsp;Sandra S Brotherton,&nbsp;Craig A Velozo","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study compared disability levels between community-dwelling adults in the United States and South Korea using two national surveys of the United States and Korean National Health and Examination Survey (NHANES and KNHANES). The Rasch common-item equating method was used to create the same measurement framework and compared average disability levels. The disability levels between the two countries were estimated using the current disability estimation method (percentage of people having disability based on a single question). A higher percentage of American adults (20.5%) showed disability than the Korean adults (9.6%) based on the current estimation method; however, using the Rasch model American adults had significantly less disability (Mean = -3.00 logits, SD = 1.67) than the Korean adults (Mean = -2.48 logits, SD = 2.13). Complementary to comparisons of the frequency of disability, comparison of the combined magnitude and strength of disability across countries provides new information that may better inform public health and policy decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":73608,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied measurement","volume":"19 2","pages":"114-128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compared disability levels between community-dwelling adults in the United States and South Korea using two national surveys of the United States and Korean National Health and Examination Survey (NHANES and KNHANES). The Rasch common-item equating method was used to create the same measurement framework and compared average disability levels. The disability levels between the two countries were estimated using the current disability estimation method (percentage of people having disability based on a single question). A higher percentage of American adults (20.5%) showed disability than the Korean adults (9.6%) based on the current estimation method; however, using the Rasch model American adults had significantly less disability (Mean = -3.00 logits, SD = 1.67) than the Korean adults (Mean = -2.48 logits, SD = 2.13). Complementary to comparisons of the frequency of disability, comparison of the combined magnitude and strength of disability across countries provides new information that may better inform public health and policy decisions.

用Rasch模型比较美国和韩国社区居住成年人的残疾水平。
本研究利用美国和韩国国家健康与检查调查(NHANES和KNHANES)的两项全国调查,比较了美国和韩国社区居住成年人的残疾水平。采用Rasch共同项目等值法建立了相同的测量框架,并比较了平均残疾水平。使用目前的残疾估计方法(基于单一问题的残疾人百分比)估计了两国之间的残疾水平。美国成年人的残疾比率(20.5%)高于韩国成年人(9.6%)。然而,使用Rasch模型,美国成年人的残疾程度(Mean = -3.00 logits, SD = 1.67)明显低于韩国成年人(Mean = -2.48 logits, SD = 2.13)。除了比较残疾发生的频率之外,比较各国残疾的综合程度和强度提供了新的信息,可以更好地为公共卫生和政策决定提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信