Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 89, Issue 4 , Pages 622-629, April 2008

Assessing Self-Care and Social Function Using a Computer Adaptive Testing Version of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory

  • Wendy J. Coster, PhD, OTR/L

      Affiliations

    • Department of Occupational Therapy and Rehabilitation Counseling, Boston University Sargent College, Boston, MA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to Wendy J. Coster, PhD, OTR/L, Dept of Occupational Therapy and Rehabilitation Counseling, Boston University Sargent College, 635 Commonwealth Ave, Boston, MA 02215
  • ,
  • Stephen M. Haley, PhD, PT

      Affiliations

    • Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA
  • ,
  • Pengsheng Ni, MD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA
  • ,
  • Helene M. Dumas, MS, PT

      Affiliations

    • Research Center for Children with Special Health Care Needs, Franciscan Hospital for Children, Boston, MA.
  • ,
  • Maria A. Fragala-Pinkham, MS, PT

      Affiliations

    • Research Center for Children with Special Health Care Needs, Franciscan Hospital for Children, Boston, MA.

Abstract 

Coster WJ, Haley SM, Ni P, Dumas HM, Fragala-Pinkham MA. Assessing self-care and social function using a computer adaptive testing version of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory.

Objective

To examine score agreement, validity, precision, and response burden of a prototype computer adaptive testing (CAT) version of the self-care and social function scales of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory compared with the full-length version of these scales.

Design

Computer simulation analysis of cross-sectional and longitudinal retrospective data; cross-sectional prospective study.

Setting

Pediatric rehabilitation hospital, including inpatient acute rehabilitation, day school program, outpatient clinics; community-based day care, preschool, and children’s homes.

Participants

Children with disabilities (n=469) and 412 children with no disabilities (analytic sample); 38 children with disabilities and 35 children without disabilities (cross-validation sample).

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Summary scores from prototype CAT applications of each scale using 15-, 10-, and 5-item stopping rules; scores from the full-length self-care and social function scales; time (in seconds) to complete assessments and respondent ratings of burden.

Results

Scores from both computer simulations and field administration of the prototype CATs were highly consistent with scores from full-length administration (r range, .94–.99). Using computer simulation of retrospective data, discriminant validity, and sensitivity to change of the CATs closely approximated that of the full-length scales, especially when the 15- and 10-item stopping rules were applied. In the cross-validation study the time to administer both CATs was 4 minutes, compared with over 16 minutes to complete the full-length scales.

Conclusions

Self-care and social function score estimates from CAT administration are highly comparable with those obtained from full-length scale administration, with small losses in validity and precision and substantial decreases in administration time.

Key Words: Outcome assessment (health care), Pediatrics, Rehabilitation

 

 Supported by the National Center on Medical Rehabilitation Research, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health (grant nos. R43 HD42388-01, K02 HD45354-01A1).

 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 1 or more of the authors. Haley has stock interest in CRE Care LLC, which distributes the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI) products. Coster and Haley have a financial interest in the distribution of PEDI products.

 Reprints are not available from the authors.

PII: S0003-9993(08)00033-6

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.09.053

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 89, Issue 4 , Pages 622-629, April 2008