@article {86,
	title = {IRT health outcomes data analysis project: an overview and summary},
	journal = {Quality of Life Research},
	volume = {16},
	number = {Suppl. 1},
	year = {2007},
	note = {Cook, Karon FTeal, Cayla RBjorner, Jakob BCella, DavidChang, Chih-HungCrane, Paul KGibbons, Laura EHays, Ron DMcHorney, Colleen AOcepek-Welikson, KatjaRaczek, Anastasia ETeresi, Jeanne AReeve, Bryce B1U01AR52171-01/AR/United States NIAMSR01 (CA60068)/CA/United States NCIY1-PC-3028-01/PC/United States NCIResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralNetherlandsQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitationQual Life Res. 2007;16 Suppl 1:121-32. Epub 2007 Mar 10.},
	pages = {121-132},
	edition = {2007/03/14},
	abstract = {BACKGROUND: In June 2004, the National Cancer Institute and the Drug Information Association co-sponsored the conference, "Improving the Measurement of Health Outcomes through the Applications of Item Response Theory (IRT) Modeling: Exploration of Item Banks and Computer-Adaptive Assessment." A component of the conference was presentation of a psychometric and content analysis of a secondary dataset. OBJECTIVES: A thorough psychometric and content analysis was conducted of two primary domains within a cancer health-related quality of life (HRQOL) dataset. RESEARCH DESIGN: HRQOL scales were evaluated using factor analysis for categorical data, IRT modeling, and differential item functioning analyses. In addition, computerized adaptive administration of HRQOL item banks was simulated, and various IRT models were applied and compared. SUBJECTS: The original data were collected as part of the NCI-funded Quality of Life Evaluation in Oncology (Q-Score) Project. A total of 1,714 patients with cancer or HIV/AIDS were recruited from 5 clinical sites. MEASURES: Items from 4 HRQOL instruments were evaluated: Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-Short Form, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Four lessons learned from the project are discussed: the importance of good developmental item banks, the ambiguity of model fit results, the limits of our knowledge regarding the practical implications of model misfit, and the importance in the measurement of HRQOL of construct definition. With respect to these lessons, areas for future research are suggested. The feasibility of developing item banks for broad definitions of health is discussed.},
	keywords = {*Data Interpretation, Statistical, *Health Status, *Quality of Life, *Questionnaires, *Software, Female, HIV Infections/psychology, Humans, Male, Neoplasms/psychology, Outcome Assessment (Health Care)/*methods, Psychometrics, Stress, Psychological},
	isbn = {0962-9343 (Print)},
	author = {Cook, K. F. and Teal, C. R. and Bjorner, J. B. and Cella, D. and Chang, C-H. and Crane, P. K. and Gibbons, L. E. and Hays, R. D. and McHorney, C. A. and Ocepek-Welikson, K. and Raczek, A. E. and Teresi, J. A. and Reeve, B. B.}
}
@article {274,
	title = {Ten recommendations for advancing patient-centered outcomes measurement for older persons},
	journal = {Annals of Internal Medicine},
	volume = {139},
	number = {5 Pt 2},
	year = {2003},
	note = {1539-3704Journal ArticleReview},
	month = {Sep 2},
	pages = {403-409},
	abstract = {The past 50 years have seen great progress in the measurement of patient-based outcomes for older populations. Most of the measures now used were created under the umbrella of a set of assumptions and procedures known as classical test theory. A recent alternative for health status assessment is item response theory. Item response theory is superior to classical test theory because it can eliminate test dependency and achieve more precise measurement through computerized adaptive testing. Computerized adaptive testing reduces test administration times and allows varied and precise estimates of ability. Several key challenges must be met before computerized adaptive testing becomes a productive reality. I discuss these challenges for the health assessment of older persons in the form of 10 "Ds": things we need to deliberate, debate, decide, and do.},
	keywords = {*Health Status Indicators, Aged, Geriatric Assessment/*methods, Humans, Patient-Centered Care/*methods, Research Support, U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t, Non-P.H.S.},
	author = {McHorney, C. A.}
}
