4.6 Article

Development of a Social Functioning Assessment Using Computerized Adaptive Testing for Patients With Stroke

Journal

ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION
Volume 99, Issue 2, Pages 306-313

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.08.492

Keywords

Cerebrovascular disorders; Interpersonal relations; Quality of life; Rehabilitation; Social participation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To develop a computerized adaptive test of social functioning (Social-CAT) for patients with stroke. Design: This study contained 2 phases. First, a unidimensional item bank was formed using social-related items with sufficient item fit (ie, infit and outfit mean square [MNSQ]). The social-related items were selected from 3 commonly used patient-reported quality-of-life measures. Items with differential item functioning (DIF) of sex were deleted. Second, we performed simulations to determine the best set of stopping rules with both high reliability and efficiency. The participants' responses to the items were extracted from a previous study. Setting: Rehabilitation wards and departments of rehabilitation/neurology of 5 general hospitals. Participants: Patients (N=263) with stroke (47.1% were inpatients). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure: Social-CAT. Results: The unidimensionality of the 24 selected items was supported (infit and outfit MNSQs = 0.8-1.2). One item had DIF of sex and was deleted. The item bank was composed of the remaining 23 items. With the best set of stopping rules (person reliability >=.90 or limited reliability increased <=.001), the Social-CAT used on average 10 items to achieve sufficient reliability (average person reliability =.88; 81.0% of the patients with reliability >=.90). Conclusions: The Social-CAT appears to be a unidimensional measure with acceptable reliability and efficiency, and it could be useful for both clinicians and patients in time-pressed clinical settings. (C) 2017 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available