Towards standardization of fatigue measurement: Psychometric properties and reference values of the PROMIS Fatigue item bank in the Dutch general population

C. Terwee, E. Elsman, L. Roorda
{"title":"Towards standardization of fatigue measurement: Psychometric properties and reference values of the PROMIS Fatigue item bank in the Dutch general population","authors":"C. Terwee, E. Elsman, L. Roorda","doi":"10.1177/26320843221089628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background There is little consensus on how to measure fatigue. Objectives To standardize the measurement of fatigue across populations, we aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the PROMIS Fatigue item bank in the Dutch general population and obtain reference values. Methods A sample of 1006 people participating in an internet panel completed the full v1.0 PROMIS Fatigue item bank (95 items). Structural validity (item response theory (IRT) assumptions and IRT model fit), measurement invariance/cross-cultural validity (absence of differential items functioning (DIF) for demographic variables and language, compared to data from US participants in PROMIS wave 1), and (internal) reliability (percentage of respondents with reliable estimates) were assessed. Results The IRT model assumptions were considered met (ECV 0.86, Omega-H 0.92), all items fitted the IRT model, no items showed DIF for demographic variables and seven for language, but with negligible impact on T-scores. Reliable fatigue T-scores were found for 98.3%, 69.8–82.6%, and 96.5% of the respondents with the full item bank, the standard short forms, and a simulated computerized adaptive test (CAT), respectively. The CAT administered on average only five items. A T-score of 49.1 represented the average score of the Dutch general population, T-scores <55 are considered within normal limits, T-scores of 55–59 indicate mild fatigue, T-scores of 60–70 indicate moderate fatigue, and T-scores >70 indicate severe fatigue. Conclusions The PROMIS Fatigue item bank showed sufficient structural validity, no measurement invariance for demographic characteristics, sufficient cross-cultural validity, and sufficient (internal) reliability in the Dutch general population.","PeriodicalId":74683,"journal":{"name":"Research methods in medicine & health sciences","volume":"3 1","pages":"86 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research methods in medicine & health sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26320843221089628","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background There is little consensus on how to measure fatigue. Objectives To standardize the measurement of fatigue across populations, we aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the PROMIS Fatigue item bank in the Dutch general population and obtain reference values. Methods A sample of 1006 people participating in an internet panel completed the full v1.0 PROMIS Fatigue item bank (95 items). Structural validity (item response theory (IRT) assumptions and IRT model fit), measurement invariance/cross-cultural validity (absence of differential items functioning (DIF) for demographic variables and language, compared to data from US participants in PROMIS wave 1), and (internal) reliability (percentage of respondents with reliable estimates) were assessed. Results The IRT model assumptions were considered met (ECV 0.86, Omega-H 0.92), all items fitted the IRT model, no items showed DIF for demographic variables and seven for language, but with negligible impact on T-scores. Reliable fatigue T-scores were found for 98.3%, 69.8–82.6%, and 96.5% of the respondents with the full item bank, the standard short forms, and a simulated computerized adaptive test (CAT), respectively. The CAT administered on average only five items. A T-score of 49.1 represented the average score of the Dutch general population, T-scores <55 are considered within normal limits, T-scores of 55–59 indicate mild fatigue, T-scores of 60–70 indicate moderate fatigue, and T-scores >70 indicate severe fatigue. Conclusions The PROMIS Fatigue item bank showed sufficient structural validity, no measurement invariance for demographic characteristics, sufficient cross-cultural validity, and sufficient (internal) reliability in the Dutch general population.
疲劳测量标准化:荷兰普通人群PROMIS疲劳项目库的心理测量特性和参考值
背景关于如何测量疲劳,目前还没有达成共识。目的为了使人群疲劳的测量标准化,我们旨在评估荷兰普通人群中PROMIS疲劳项目库的心理测量特性,并获得参考值。方法1006名参与网络小组的人完成了完整的1.0版PROMIS疲劳项目库(95个项目)。评估了结构有效性(项目反应理论(IRT)假设和IRT模型拟合)、测量不变性/跨文化有效性(与PROMIS第1波的美国参与者的数据相比,人口统计学变量和语言缺乏差异项目功能(DIF))和(内部)可靠性(具有可靠估计的受访者百分比)。结果符合IRT模型的假设(ECV 0.86,Omega-H 0.92),所有项目都符合IRT模式,没有项目显示人口统计学变量的DIF,有7个项目显示语言的DIF。但对T评分的影响可以忽略不计。在使用完整项目库、标准简表和模拟计算机自适应测试(CAT)的受访者中,可靠的疲劳T评分分别为98.3%、69.8-82.6%和96.5%。CAT平均只管理五个项目。49.1的T分数代表荷兰普通人群的平均分数,70的T分数表示严重疲劳。结论PROMIS疲劳项目库在荷兰普通人群中表现出足够的结构有效性、对人口统计学特征没有测量不变性、足够的跨文化有效性和足够的(内部)可靠性。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信