Scoring the EQ-HWB-S: can we do it without value sets? A non-parametric item response theory analysis

Background Only one pilot value set (UK) is currently available for the EQ Health and Wellbeing Instrument short version (EQ-HWB-S). As an alternative to preference-weighted scoring, we examined whether a level summary score (LSS) is appropriate for the EQ-HWB-S using Mokken scaling analyses. Method...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Quality of life research 2024-05, Vol.33 (5), p.1211-1222
Hauptverfasser: Feng, You-Shan, Kohlmann, Thomas, Peasgood, Tessa, Engel, Lidia, Mulhern, Brendan, Pickard, A. Simon
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Only one pilot value set (UK) is currently available for the EQ Health and Wellbeing Instrument short version (EQ-HWB-S). As an alternative to preference-weighted scoring, we examined whether a level summary score (LSS) is appropriate for the EQ-HWB-S using Mokken scaling analyses. Methods Data from patients, carers and the general population collected during the developmental phase of the EQ-HWB-S in Australia, US and UK were used, noting 3 of 9 items have since undergone revision. EQ-HWB-S data fit was examined using R package Mokken scaling’s monotone homogeneity model, utilizing the automated item selection procedure (AISP) as well as Loevinger’s scaling coefficients for items and the scale (H S ). Manifest monotonicity was assessed by examining whether the cumulative probability for responses at or above each response level did not decrease across the summary score. Results EQ-HWB-S data were available for 3340 respondents: US = 903, Australia = 514 and UK = 1923. Mean age was 50 ± 18 and 1841 (55%) were female. AISP placed all 9 items of the EQ-HWB-S on a single scale when the lower bound was set to 
ISSN:0962-9343
1573-2649
DOI:10.1007/s11136-024-03601-7