Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 87, Issue 8 , Pages 1033-1042 , August 2006

Computerized Adaptive Testing for Follow-Up After Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation: I. Activity Outcomes

  • Stephen M. Haley, PhD, PT

      Affiliations

    • Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University, Boston, MA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Stephen M. Haley, PhD, PT, Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University, 53 Bay State Rd, Boston, MA 02215
    • ,
  • Hilary Siebens, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
    • ,
  • Wendy J. Coster, PhD, OTR

      Affiliations

    • Department of Occupational Therapy and Rehabilitation Counseling, Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Boston University, Boston, MA
    • ,
  • Wei Tao, BS

      Affiliations

    • Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University, Boston, MA
    • ,
  • Randie M. Black-Schaffer, MD, MA

      Affiliations

    • Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital and the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston MA
    • ,
  • Barbara Gandek, MS

      Affiliations

    • Health Assessment Lab, Waltham, MA
    • ,
  • Samuel J. Sinclair, MEd

      Affiliations

    • Health Assessment Lab, Waltham, MA
    • ,
  • Pengsheng Ni, MD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University, Boston, MA

References 

  1. Dijkers MP . A computer adaptive testing simulation applied to the FIM instrument motor component . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2003;84:384–393
  2. Ware J , Gandek B , Sinclair S , Bjorner B . Item response theory in computer adaptive testing (implications for outcomes measurement in rehabilitation) . Rehabil Psychol . 2005;50:71–78
  3. Jette AM , Haley SM . Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcome assessment . J Rehabil Med . 2005;37:339–345
  4. Revicki DA , Cella DF . Health status assessment for the twenty-first century (item response theory, item banking and computer adaptive testing) . Qual Life Res . 1997;6:595–600
  5. Wainer H . Computerized adaptive testing (a primer) . Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000;
  6. Haley SM, Ni P, Hambleton RK, Slavin MD, Jette AM. Computer adaptive testing improves accuracy and precision of scores over random item selection in a physical functioning item bank. J Clin Epidemiol. In press.
  7. Haley SM , Coster WJ , Andres PL , Kosinski M , Ni P . Score comparability of short forms and computerized adaptive testing (simulation study with the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care) . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2004;85:661–666
  8. Andres PL , Black-Schaffer RM , Ni PS , Haley SM . Computer adaptive testing (a strategy for monitoring stroke rehabilitation across settings) . Top Stroke Rehabil . 2004;11(2):33–39
  9. Siebens H , Andres PL , Ni P , Coster WJ , Haley SM . Measuring physical function in patients with complex medical and postsurgical conditions (a computer adaptive approach) . Am J Phys Med Rehabil . 2005;84:741–748
  10. Hart DL , Mioduski JE , Stratford PW . Simulated computerized adaptive tests for measuring functional status were efficient with good discriminant validity in patients with hip, knee, or foot/ankle impairments . J Clin Epidemiol . 2005;58:629–638
  11. Ware J , Kosinski M , Bjorner J , et al.   Applications of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) to the assessment of headache impact . Qual Life Res . 2003;12:935–952
  12. Haley SM , Raczek AE , Coster WJ , Dumas HM , Fragala-Pinkham MA . Assessing mobility in children using a computer adaptive testing version of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2005;86:932–939
  13. Haley SM, Fragala-Pinkham MA, Ni P. Sensitivity of a computer adaptive assessment for measuring functional mobility changes in children enrolled in a community fitness program. Clin Rehabil. In press.
  14. Andresen EM . Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2000;81(12 Suppl 2):S15–S20
  15. Coster WJ , Haley SM , Jette AM . Measuring patient-reported outcomes after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation settings . J Rehabil Med . 2006;38:237–242
  16. Haley SM , Andres PL , Coster WJ , Kosinski M , Ni PS , Jette AM . Short-form activity measure for post-acute care . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2004;85:649–660
  17. Haley SM , Coster WJ , Andres PL , et al.   Activity outcome measurement for post-acute care . Med Care . 2004;42(Suppl 1):I49–I61
  18. Coster WJ , Haley SM , Andres PL , Ludlow LH , Bond TL , Ni PS . Refining the conceptual basis for rehabilitation outcome measurement (personal care and instrumental activities domain) . Med Care . 2004;42(Suppl 1):I62–I72
  19. Coster WJ , Haley SM , Ludlow LH , Andres PL , Ni PS . Development of an applied cognition scale to measure rehabilitation outcomes . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2004;85:2030–2035
  20. Callahan CM , Uvnverzagt FW , Hui SL , Perkins AJ , Hendrie HC . Six-item screener to identify cognitive impairment among potential subjects for clinical research . Med Care . 2002;40:771–781
  21. van Swieten JC , Koudstaal PJ , Visser MC , Schouten HJ , van Gijn J . Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients . Stroke . 1988;19:604–607
  22. Ware J , Kosinski M , Dewey J , Gandek B . How to score and interpret single-item health status measures (a manual for users of the SF-8 Health Survey) . Lincoln: QualityMetric; 1999;
  23. Muraki E , Bock RD . Parscale (IRT item analysis and test scoring for rating—scale data) . Chicago: Scientific Software International; 1997;
  24. Mislevy RJ , Bock RD . BILOG-3 (item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models) . Chicago: Scientific Software International; 1990;
  25. Hambleton R , Swaminathan H , Rogers H . Fundamentals of item response theory . Newbury Park: Sage; 1991;
  26. van der Linden W , Hambleton R . Handbook of modern item response theory . Berlin: Springer; 1997;
  27. Yen WM . Scaling performance assessments (strategies for managing local item dependence) . J Educ Meas . 1993;30:187–213
  28. Warm TA . Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory . Psychometrika . 1989;54:427–450
  29. Wang SD , Wang TY . Precision of Warm’s weighted likelihood estimates for polytomous model in computerized adaptive testing . Appl Psychol Meas . 2001;25:317–331
  30. Ware JE , Bjorner JB , Kosinski M . Practical implications of item response theory and computerized adaptive testing (a brief summary of ongoing studies of widely used headache impact scales) . Med Care . 2000;38(9 Suppl):II73–II82
  31. Guide for the Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation (including the FIM instrument), version 5.1 . Buffalo: State Univ New York; 1997;
  32. Jaeschke R , Singer J , Guyatt GH . Measurement of health status (ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference) . Control Clin Trials . 1989;10:407–415
  33. Osoba D , Rodrigues G , Myles J , Zee B , Pater J . Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores . J Clin Oncol . 1998;16:139–144
  34. Wiebe S , Matijevic S , Eliasziw M , Derry PA . Clinically important change in quality of life in epilepsy . J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry . 2002;73:116–120
  35. Shrout PE , Fleiss JL . Intraclass correlations (uses in assessing rater reliability) . Psychol Bull . 1979;86:420–428
  36. de Haan R , Horn J , Limburg M , Van Der Meulen J , Bossuyt P . A comparison of five stroke scales with measures of disability, handicap, and quality of life . Stroke . 1993;24:1178–1181
  37. Kazis LE , Anderson JJ , Meenan RF . Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status . Med Care . 1989;27(Suppl):S178–S189
  38. Liang M , Lew R , Stucki G , Fortin P , Daltroy L . Measuring clinically important changes with patient-oriented questionnaires . Med Care . 2002;40(4 Suppl):II45–II51
  39. Rosenthal R , Rosnow R . Essentials of behavioral research (methods and data analysis) . 2nd ed.. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991;
  40. Dunlap W , Cortina J , Vaslow J , Burke M . Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs . Psychol Methods . 1996;1:170–177
  41. Hanley JA , McNeil BJ . A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases . Radiology . 1983;148:839–843
  42. Weinstein MC , Berwick DM , Goldman PA , Murphy JM , Barsky A . A comparison of three psychiatric screening tests using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis . Med Care . 1989;27:593–607
  43. Delong E , DeLong D , Clarke-Pearson D . Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves (a nonparametric approach) . Biometrics . 1988;44:837–845
  44. Andres PL , Haley SM , Ni PS . Is patient-reported function reliable for monitoring post-acute outcomes? . Am J Phys Med Rehabil . 2003;82:614–621
  45. Cella D , Hahn EA , Dineen K . Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores (differences between improvement and worsening) . Qual Life Res . 2002;11:207–221
  46. Cella D , Eton DT , Lai JS , Peterman AH , Merkel DE . Combining anchor and distribution-based methods to derive minimal clinically important differences on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) anemia and fatigue scales . J Pain Symptom Manage . 2002;24:547–561

 Supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (grant no. R01 HD043568) and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and an independent scientist award (grant no. K02 HD45354-01).A commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has conferred or will confer a financial benefit upon the author or 1 or more of the authors. Haley has stock interest in CRE Care LLC, which distributes the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care products.

PII: S0003-9993(06)00402-3

doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.04.020

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 87, Issue 8 , Pages 1033-1042 , August 2006

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution