Dataset Information

A Short Note on Aberrant Responses Bias in Item Response Theory.

ABSTRACT: Item response models often cannot calculate true individual response probabilities because of the existence of response disturbances (such as guessing and cheating). Many studies on aberrant responses under item response theory (IRT) framework had been conducted. Some of them focused on how to reduce the effect of aberrant responses, and others focused on how to detect aberrant examinees, such as person fit analysis. The purpose of this research was to derive a generalized formula of bias with/without aberrant responses, that showed the effect of both non-aberrant and aberrant response data on the bias of capability estimation mathematically. A new evaluation criterion, named aberrant absolute bias (|ABIAS|), was proposed to detect aberrant examinees. Simulation studies and application to a real dataset were conducted to demonstrate the efficiency and the utility of |ABIAS|.

SUBMITTER: Jia B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6365413 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Short Note on Aberrant Responses Bias in Item Response Theory.

Jia Bing B Zhang Xue X Zhu Zhemin Z

Frontiers in psychology 20190131

Item response models often cannot calculate true individual response probabilities because of the existence of response disturbances (such as guessing and cheating). Many studies on aberrant responses under item response theory (IRT) framework had been conducted. Some of them focused on how to reduce the effect of aberrant responses, and others focused on how to detect aberrant examinees, such as person fit analysis. The purpose of this research was to derive a generalized formula of bias with/w ...[more]

PMID: 30766496

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere has recently been growing interest in the roles of inflammation in contributing to the development of anxiety in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID). Patient-reported outcome measures can facilitate the assessment of physical and psychological functioning. The National Institutes of Health (NIH)'s Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) is a set of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) that cover physical appearance, mental health, and social health. The PROMIS has been built through an Item Response Theory approach (IRT), a model-based measurement in which trait level estimates depend on both persons' responses and on the properties of the items that were administered. The aim of this study is to test the psychometric properties of an Italian custom four-item Short Form of the PROMIS Anxiety item bank in a cohort of outpatients with IMIDs.MethodsWe selected four items from the Italian standard Short Form Anxiety 8a and administered them to consecutive outpatients affected by Inflammatory Bowel disease (n = 246), rheumatological (n = 100) and dermatological (n = 43) diseases, and healthy volunteers (n = 280). Data was analyzed through an Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis in order to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Italian adaptation of the PROMIS anxiety short form.ResultsTaken together, Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Exploratory Factor analysis suggest that the unidimensionality assumption of the instrument holds. The instrument has excellent reliability from a Classical Theory of Test (CTT) standpoint (Cronbach's α = 0.93, McDonald's ω = 0.92). The 2PL Graded Response Model (GRM) model provided showed a better goodness of fit as compared to the 1PL GRM model, and local independence assumption appears to be met overall. We did not find signs of differential item functioning (DIF) for age and gender, but evidence for uniform (but not non-uniform) DIF was found in three out of four items for the patient vs. control group. Analysis of the test reliability curve suggested that the instrument is most reliable for higher levels of the latent trait of anxiety. The groups of patients exhibited higher levels of anxiety as compared to the control group (ps < 0.001, Bonferroni-corrected). The groups of patients were not different between themselves (p = 1, Bonferroni-corrected). T-scores based on estimated latent trait and raw scores were highly correlated (Pearson's r = 0.98) and led to similar results.DiscussionThe Italian custom four-item short form from the PROMIS anxiety form 8a shows acceptable psychometric properties both from a CTT and an IRT standpoint. The Test Reliability Curve shows that this instrument is mostly informative for people with higher levels of anxiety, making it particularly suitable for clinical populations such as IMID patients.

Project description:BackgroundThis study compares classical test theory and item response theory frameworks to determine reliable change. Reliable change followed by anchoring to the change in categorically distinct responses on a criterion measure is a useful method to detect meaningful change on a target measure.MethodsAdult cancer patients were recruited from five cancer centers. Baseline and follow-up assessments at 6 weeks were administered. We investigated short forms derived from PROMIS® item banks on anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain intensity, pain interference, and sleep disturbance. We detected reliable change using reliable change index (RCI). We derived the T-scores corresponding to the RCI calculated under IRT and CTT frameworks using PROMIS® short forms. For changes that were reliable, meaningful change was identified using patient-reported change in PRO-CTCAE by at least one level. For both CTT and IRT approaches, we applied one-sided tests to detect reliable improvement or worsening using RCI. We compared the percentages of patients with reliable change and reliable/meaningful change.ResultsThe amount of change in T score corresponding to RCICTT of 1.65 ranged from 5.1 to 9.2 depending on domains. The amount of change corresponding to RCIIRT of 1.65 varied across the score range, and the minimum change ranged from 3.0 to 8.2 depending on domains. Across domains, the RCICTT and RCIIRT classified 80% to 98% of the patients consistently. When there was disagreement, the RCIIRT tended to identify more patients as having reliably changed compared to RCICTT if scores at both timepoints were in the range of 43 to 78 in anxiety, 45 to 70 in depression, 38 to 80 in fatigue, 35 to 78 in sleep disturbance, and 48 to 74 in pain interference, due to smaller standard errors in these ranges using the IRT method. The CTT method found more changes compared to IRT for the pain intensity domain that was shorter in length. Using RCICTT, 22% to 66% had reliable change in either direction depending on domains, and among these patients, 62% to 83% had meaningful change. Using RCIIRT, 37% to 68% had reliable change in either direction, and among these patients, 62% to 81% had meaningful change.ConclusionApplying the two-step criteria demonstrated in this study, we determined how much change is needed to declare reliable change at different levels of baseline scores. We offer reference values for percentage of patients who meaningfully change for investigators using the PROMIS instruments in oncology.

Dataset Information

A Short Note on Aberrant Responses Bias in Item Response Theory.

Publications

A Short Note on Aberrant Responses Bias in Item Response Theory.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets