Quality of Life Research

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 521–529 | Cite as

Psychometric assessment of the patient activation measure short form (PAM-13) in rural settings

  • Man HungEmail author
  • Marjorie Carter
  • Candace Hayden
  • Rhonda Dzierzon
  • Jose Morales
  • Laverne Snow
  • Jorie Butler
  • Kim Bateman
  • Matthew Samore
Brief Communication



The patient activation measure short form (PAM-13) assesses patients’ self-reported health management skills, knowledge, confidence, and motivation. We used item response theory to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PAM-13 utilized in rural settings.


A Rasch partial credit model analysis was conducted on the PAM-13 instrument using a sample of 812 rural patients recruited by providers and our research staff. Specially, we examined dimensionality, item fit, and quality of measures, category response curves, and item differential functioning. Convergent and divergent validities were also examined.


The PAM-13 instrument has excellent convergent and divergent validities. It is fairly unidimensional, and all items fit the Rasch model well. It has relatively high person and item reliability indices. Majority of the items were free of item differential functioning. There were, however, some issues with ceiling effects. Additionally, there was a lack of responses for category one across all items.


Patient activation measure short form (PAM-13) performs well in some areas, but not all. In general, more items need to be added to cover the upper end of the trait. The four response categories of PAM-13 should be collapsed into three.


Patient activation measure Electronic medical record Psychometric Rasch Health care management Quality of life 



This investigation was supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality research grant number R18-HS-017308.


  1. 1.
    Hibbard, J. H., Stockard, J., Mahoney, E. R., & Tusler, M. (2004). Development of the patient activation measure (PAM): Conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Service Research, 39(4 Pt 1), 1005–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Virani, S., Burke, L., Remick, S. C., & Abraham, J. (2011). Barriers to recruitment of rural patients in cancer clinical trials. Journal of Oncology Practice, 7(3), 172–177.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buzza, C., Ono, S. S., Turvey, C., Wittrock, S., Noble, M., Reddy, G., et al. (2011). Distance is relative: Unpacking a principal barrier in rural healthcare. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26(Suppl 2), 648–654.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tollefson, J., Usher, K., & Foster, K. (2011). Relationship in pain: The experience of relationships to people living with chronic pain in rural areas. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 17, 478–485.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hartley, D. (2004). Rural health disparities, population health, and rural culture. American Journal of Public Health, 94(10), 1675–1678.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Phillips, C. D., Hawes, C., & Leyk Williams, M. (2003). Nursing homes in rural and urban areas, 2000. College Station, TX, USA: The Texas A&M University System Health Science Center, School of Rural Public Health, Southwest Rural Health Research Center.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eberhardt, M., Ingram, D., & Makuc, D. (2001). Health, United States 2001: Urban and rural health chart book. Hyattsville, MD, USA: National Center for Health Statistics.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coward, R. T., McLaughlin, D., & Duncan, R. P. (1994). An overview of health and aging in rural America. In R. T. Coward, G. Brill, & G. Kukulaka (Eds.), Health services for rural elders. New York, NY, USA: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Norton, C. H., & McManus, M. A. (1989). Background tables on demographic characteristics, health status, and health services utilization. Health Services Research, 23(6), 725–756.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schlenker, R. E., Powell, M. C., & Goodrich, G. K. (2002). Rural-urban home health care differences before the balanced budget act of 1997. Journal of Rural Health, 18(2), 359–372.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gamm, L., Hutchison, L., & Dabney, B. J. (2003). Rural healthy people 2010: A companion document to healthy people 2010. College Station, TX, USA: The Texas A&M University System Health Science Center, School of Rural Public Health, Southwest Rural Health Research Center.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Darby, C., Crofton, C., & Clancy, C. M. (2006). Consumer assessment of health providers and systems (CAHPS): Evolving to meet stakeholder needs. American Journal of Medical Quality, 21(2), 144–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hung, M., Clegg, D. O., Greene, T., & Saltzman, C. L. (2011). Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function item bank in orthopaedic patients. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 29(6), 947–953.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Masters, G. N. (1988). The analysis of partial credit scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 1(4), 279–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Joyce, T. B., & Yates, S. M. (2007). A Rasch analysis of the academic self-concept questionnaire. International Education Journal, 8(2), 470–484.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Linacre, J. M. (2011). A user’s guide to WINSTEPS/MINISTEPS rasch model computer programs. USA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Teresi, J., Ocepek-Welikson, K., Kleinman, M., Eimicke, J. P., Crane, P. K., Jones, R. N., et al. (2009). Analysis of differential item functioning in the depression item bank from the patient reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS): An item response theory approach. Psychology Science Quarterly, 51(2), 148–180.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Gerrard, M. (1986). Beyond group-mean differences: The concept of item bias. Psychological Bullentin, 99, 118–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang, W. C., & Yeh, Y. L. (2003). Effects of anchor item methods on differential item functioning detection with likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 479–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Man Hung
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marjorie Carter
    • 3
  • Candace Hayden
    • 2
  • Rhonda Dzierzon
    • 2
  • Jose Morales
    • 2
  • Laverne Snow
    • 2
  • Jorie Butler
    • 3
  • Kim Bateman
    • 2
  • Matthew Samore
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery OperationsUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  3. 3.Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Health Care SystemSalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations