Skip to main content

Modern Psychometric Approaches to Analysis of Scales for Health-Related Quality of Life

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Beyond Assessment of Quality of Life in Schizophrenia

Abstract

In recent years, much effort has been invested in the development of new instruments for assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL). For many new instruments, modern psychometric methods, such as item response theory (IRT) models, have been used, either as supplemental to classical psychometric testing or as the primary methodological approach. We will use the term modern psychometric methods to refer to psychometric methods for multi-item scales that (1) examine the contribution of each item to the measurement properties of the overall scale and (2) recognize that items are categorical. The models include Rasch models (Rasch 1980; Fischer and Molenaar 1995), other IRT models (Samejima 1969; van der Linden and Hambleton 1997), and factor analytic models for categorical data (Muthén 1984). “Modern” psychometric methods have actually a rather long history within psychiatric research (both focusing on self-reported scales (Bech et al. 1978) and psychiatric outcome rating scales (Bech et al. 1984)). During the past 25 years, modern psychometric methods have increasingly been used in the analysis of patient-reported outcome measures (Teresi et al. 1989; Haley et al. 1994). For example, the NIH-sponsored Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) project relies primarily on modern psychometric methods (Reeve et al. 2007). Similarly, modern psychometric analyses have started to be adopted for analysis of patient-reported HRQOL measures for patients with schizophrenia (D’haenen 1996; Pan et al. 2007; Boyer et al. 2010; Reise et al. 2011a; Laurens et al. 2012; Mojtabai et al. 2012; Chen et al. 2013; Michel et al. 2013; Park et al. 2015; Galindo-Garre et al. 2015; Norholm and Bech 2006). The present chapter provides an introduction to modern psychometric methods and discusses their potential use for analyses of HRQOL data from patients with schizophrenia. Rather than focusing on one particular approach, we will show what the methods have in common and how they can supplement each other.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andersen EB. A goodness of fit test for the Rasch model. Psychometrika. 1973;38:123–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika. 1978;43:561–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Awad AG, Voruganti LN, Heslegrave RJ. A conceptual model of quality of life in schizophrenia: description and preliminary clinical validation. Qual Life Res. 1997;6:21–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bech P. Clinical assessments of positive mental health. In: Jeste DV, Palmer BW, editors. Positive psychiatry: a clinician handbook. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2015. p. 127–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bech P, Allerup P, Rosenberg R. The Marke-Nyman temperament scale. Evaluation of transferability using the Rasch item analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 1978;57:49–58.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bech P, Allerup P, Reisby N, Gram LF. Assessment of symptom change from improvement curves on the Hamilton depression scale in trials with antidepressants. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1984;84:276–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bech P, Allerup P, Larsen ER, Csillag C, Licht RW. The Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale (MADRS). A psychometric re-analysis of the European genome-based therapeutic drugs for depression study using Rasch analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2014;217:226–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bjorner JB, Kosinski M, Ware Jr JE. Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the headache impact test (HIT). Qual Life Res. 2003;12:913–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bjorner JB, Chang CH, Thissen D, Reeve BB. Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007;16 Suppl 1:95–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bock RD. The nominal categories model. In: van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK, editors. Handbook of modern item response theory. Berlin: Springer; 1997. p. 3–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock RD, Mislevy RJ. Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Appl Psychol Meas. 1982;6:431–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer L, Simeoni MC, Loundou A, D’Amato T, Reine G, Lancon C, et al. The development of the S-QoL 18: a shortened quality of life questionnaire for patients with schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2010;121:241–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer L, Millier A, Perthame E, Aballea S, Auquier P, Toumi M. Quality of life is predictive of relapse in schizophrenia. BMC Psychiatry. 2013;13:15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Cai L, Thissen D, du Troit SHC. IRTPRO for windows. [Computer software]. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International; 2011a.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai L, Yang JS, Hansen M. Generalized full-information item bifactor analysis. Psychol Methods. 2011b;16:221–48.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chen YL, Hsiung PC, Chung L, Chen SC, Pan AW. Psychometric properties of the mastery scale-Chinese version: applying classical test theory and Rasch analysis. Scand J Occup Ther. 2013;20:404–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen KB, Bjorner JB, Kreiner S, Petersen JH. Tests for unidimensionality in polytomous Rasch models. Psychometrika. 2002;67:563–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell J, O’Cathain A, Brazier J. Measuring quality of life in mental health: are we asking the right questions? Soc Sci Med. 2014;120:12–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • D’haenen H. Measurement of anhedonia. Eur Psychiat. 1996;11:335–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drasgow F, Levine MV, Williams EA. Appropriateness measurement with polychotomous item response models and standardized indices. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1985;38:67–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellervik C, Kvetny J, Bech P. The relationship between sleep length and restorative sleep in major depression. Results from the Danish General Suburban Population. Psychother Psychosom. 2016;85(1):45–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Embretson SE. Implications of a multidimensional latent trait model for measuring change. In: Collins LM, Horn J, editors. Best methods for the analysis of change. Washington DC: American Psychological Association; 1991. p. 184–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer GH, Molenaar IW. Rasch models – foundations, recent developments, and applications. 1st ed. Berlin: Springer; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galindo-Garre F, Hidalgo MD, Guilera G, Pino O, Rojo JE, Gomez-Benito J. Modeling the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II using non-parametric item response models. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2015;24:1–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner W, Kelleher KJ, Pajer KA. Multidimensional adaptive testing for mental health problems in primary care. Med Care. 2002;40:812–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glas CAW. Modification indices for the 2-PL and the nominal response model. Psychometrika. 1999;64:273–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glas CAW, Verhelst ND. Tests of fit for polytomous Rasch models. In: Fischer GH, Molenaar IW, editors. Rasch models – foundations, recent developments, and applications. Berlin: Springer; 1995. p. 325–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haley SM, McHorney CA, Ware Jr JE. Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10): I. Unidimensionality and reproducibility of the Rasch item scale. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:671–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Eq Model. 1999;6:1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan A, Lindenmayer JP, Opler M, Yavorsky C, Rothman B, Lucic L. A new Integrated Negative Symptom structure of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) in schizophrenia using item response analysis. Schizophr Res. 2013;150:185–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kreiner S, Christensen KB. Analysis of local dependence and multidimensionality in graphical loglinear Rasch models. Commu Stat Theory Methods. 2004;33:1239–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurens KR, Hobbs MJ, Sunderland M, Green MJ, Mould GL. Psychotic-like experiences in a community sample of 8000 children aged 9 to 11 years: an item response theory analysis. Psychol Med. 2012;42:1495–506.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Thissen D. Comparing score tests and other local dependence diagnostics for the graded response model. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2014;67:496–513.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Masters GN, Wright BD. The partial credit model. In: van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK, editors. Handbook of modern item response theory. Berlin: Springer; 1997. p. 101–22.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Michel P, Baumstarck K, Auquier P, Amador X, Dumas R, Fernandez J, et al. Psychometric properties of the abbreviated version of the scale to assess unawareness in mental disorder in schizophrenia. BMC Psychiatry. 2013;13:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel P, Auquier P, Baumstarck K, Loundou A, Ghattas B, Lancon C, et al. How to interpret multidimensional quality of life questionnaires for patients with schizophrenia? Qual Life Res. 2015;24:2483–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mojtabai R, Corey-Lisle PK, Ip EH, Kopeykina I, Haeri S, Cohen LJ, et al. The patient assessment questionnaire: initial validation of a measure of treatment effectiveness for patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2012;200:857–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mokken RJ. A theory and procedure of scale analysis. Berlin: Mouton; 1971.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Muraki E. A generalized partial credit model. In: van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK, editors. Handbook of modern item response theory. Berlin: Springer; 1997. p. 153–64.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén BO. A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika. 1984;29:177–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén BO, Muthén L. Mplus User’s guide (version 7) [Computer software]. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norholm V, Bech P. Quality of life in schizophrenic patients: association with depressive symptoms. Nord J Psychiatry. 2006;60:32–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Orlando M, Thissen D. Further investigation of the performance of S – X2: an item fit index for use with dichotomous item response theory models. Appl Psychol Meas. 2003;27:289–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlando M, Sherbourne CD, Thissen D. Summed-score linking using item response theory: application to depression measurement. Psychol Assess. 2000;12:354–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Østergaard SD, Lemming OM, Mors O, Correll CU, Bech P. PANSS-6: a valid, brief rating scale for the measurement of symptom severity and cross-sectional remission in schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2015. doi:10.1111/acps.12526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan AW, Chung L, Fife BL, Hsiung PC. Evaluation of the psychometrics of the social impact scale: a measure of stigmatization. Int J Rehabil Res. 2007;30:235–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Park IJ, Jung DC, Hwang SS, Jung HY, Yoon JS, Kim CE, et al. Refinement of the SWN-20 based on the Rasch rating model. Compr Psychiatry. 2015;60:134–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay JO. Kernel smoothing approaches to nonparametric item characteristic curve estimation. Psychometrika. 1991;56:611–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner JB, Cook KF, Crane PK, Teresi JA, et al. Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Med Care. 2007;45:S22–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reise SP, Morizot J, Hays RD. The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Qual Life Res. 2007;16 Suppl 1:19–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reise SP, Horan WP, Blanchard JJ. The challenges of fitting an item response theory model to the social anhedonia scale. J Pers Assess. 2011a;93:213–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Reise SP, Ventura J, Keefe RS, Baade LE, Gold JM, Green MF, et al. Bifactor and item response theory analyses of interviewer report scales of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia. Psychol Assess. 2011b;23:245–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum PR. Testing the conditional independence and monotonicity assumptions of item response theory. Psychometrika. 1984;49:425–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samejima F. Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psy Mono Suppl. 1969;17:1–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samejima F. Graded response model. In: van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK, editors. Handbook of modern item response theory. Berlin: Springer; 1997. p. 85–100.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Santor DA, Ascher-Svanum H, Lindenmayer JP, Obenchain RL. Item response analysis of the positive and negative syndrome scale. BMC Psychiatry. 2007;7:66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sijtsma K, Hemker BT. Nonparametric polytomous IRT models for invariant item ordering, with results for parametric models. Psychometrika. 1998;63:183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith RM, Plackner C. The family approach to assessing fit in Rasch measurement. J Appl Meas. 2008;10:424–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stochl J, Jones, PB, Perez J, Khandaker GM, Böhnke JR, Croudace TJ. (2015). Effects of ignoring clustered data structure in confirmatory factor analysis of ordered polytomous items: a simulation study based on PANSS. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout W, Habing B, Douglas J, Kim RH, Roussos L, Zhang J. Conditional covariance-based nonparametric multidimensionality assessment. Psychol Meas. 2001;20:331–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1358–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Teresi JA, Cross PS, Golden RR. Some applications of latent trait analysis to the measurement of ADL. J Gerontol. 1989;44:S196–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van den Berg SM, Paap MC, Derks EM. Using multidimensional modeling to combine self-report symptoms with clinical judgment of schizotypy. Psychiatry Res. 2013;206:75–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK. Handbook of modern item response theory. Berlin: Springer; 1997.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Veit CL, Ware Jr JE. The structure of psychological distress and well-being in general populations. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983;51:730–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Verhelst ND, Verstralen HHFM. An IRT model for multiple raters. In: Boomsma A, van Duijn M, Snijders T, editors. Essays on item response theory. New York: Springer; 2001. p. 89–108.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ware Jr JE, Kosinski M, Bjorner JB, Turner-Bowker DM, Maruish M. SF-36 health survey. Manual and interpretation guide. 2nd ed. Lincoln: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warm TA. Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika. 1989;54:427–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zumbo BD. A handbook on the theory and methods of Differential Item Functioning (DIF): logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jakob Bue Bjorner MD, PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bjorner, J.B., Bech, P. (2016). Modern Psychometric Approaches to Analysis of Scales for Health-Related Quality of Life. In: Awad, A., Voruganti, L. (eds) Beyond Assessment of Quality of Life in Schizophrenia. Adis, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30061-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30061-0_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Adis, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30059-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30061-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics