@article {173,
	title = {Replenishing a computerized adaptive test of patient-reported daily activity functioning},
	journal = {Quality of Life Research},
	volume = {18},
	number = {4},
	year = {2009},
	note = {Haley, Stephen MNi, PengshengJette, Alan MTao, WeiMoed, RichardMeyers, DougLudlow, Larry HK02 HD45354-01/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United StatesResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralNetherlandsQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitationQual Life Res. 2009 May;18(4):461-71. Epub 2009 Mar 14.},
	month = {May},
	pages = {461-71},
	edition = {2009/03/17},
	abstract = {PURPOSE: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) item banks may need to be updated, but before new items can be added, they must be linked to the previous CAT. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 41 pretest items prior to including them into an operational CAT. METHODS: We recruited 6,882 patients with spine, lower extremity, upper extremity, and nonorthopedic impairments who received outpatient rehabilitation in one of 147 clinics across 13 states of the USA. Forty-one new Daily Activity (DA) items were administered along with the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care Daily Activity CAT (DA-CAT-1) in five separate waves. We compared the scoring consistency with the full item bank, test information function (TIF), person standard errors (SEs), and content range of the DA-CAT-1 to the new CAT (DA-CAT-2) with the pretest items by real data simulations. RESULTS: We retained 29 of the 41 pretest items. Scores from the DA-CAT-2 were more consistent (ICC = 0.90 versus 0.96) than DA-CAT-1 when compared with the full item bank. TIF and person SEs were improved for persons with higher levels of DA functioning, and ceiling effects were reduced from 16.1\% to 6.1\%. CONCLUSIONS: Item response theory and online calibration methods were valuable in improving the DA-CAT.},
	keywords = {*Activities of Daily Living, *Disability Evaluation, *Questionnaires, *User-Computer Interface, Adult, Aged, Cohort Studies, Computer-Assisted Instruction, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome Assessment (Health Care)/*methods},
	isbn = {0962-9343 (Print)0962-9343 (Linking)},
	author = {Haley, S. M. and Ni, P. and Jette, A. M. and Tao, W. and Moed, R. and Meyers, D. and Ludlow, L. H.}
}
@article {174,
	title = {Measurement precision and efficiency of multidimensional computer adaptive testing of physical functioning using the pediatric evaluation of disability inventory},
	journal = {Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation},
	volume = {87},
	number = {9},
	year = {2006},
	note = {Haley, Stephen MNi, PengshengLudlow, Larry HFragala-Pinkham, Maria AK02 hd45354-01/hd/nichdResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}tUnited StatesArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitationArch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Sep;87(9):1223-9.},
	month = {Sep},
	pages = {1223-9},
	edition = {2006/08/29},
	abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To compare the measurement efficiency and precision of a multidimensional computer adaptive testing (M-CAT) application to a unidimensional CAT (U-CAT) comparison using item bank data from 2 of the functional skills scales of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI). DESIGN: Using existing PEDI mobility and self-care item banks, we compared the stability of item calibrations and model fit between unidimensional and multidimensional Rasch models and compared the efficiency and precision of the U-CAT- and M-CAT-simulated assessments to a random draw of items. SETTING: Pediatric rehabilitation hospital and clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Clinical and normative samples. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Not applicable. RESULTS: The M-CAT had greater levels of precision and efficiency than the separate mobility and self-care U-CAT versions when using a similar number of items for each PEDI subdomain. Equivalent estimation of mobility and self-care scores can be achieved with a 25\% to 40\% item reduction with the M-CAT compared with the U-CAT. CONCLUSIONS: M-CAT applications appear to have both precision and efficiency advantages compared with separate U-CAT assessments when content subdomains have a high correlation. Practitioners may also realize interpretive advantages of reporting test score information for each subdomain when separate clinical inferences are desired.},
	keywords = {*Disability Evaluation, *Pediatrics, Adolescent, Child, Child, Preschool, Computers, Disabled Persons/*classification/rehabilitation, Efficiency, Humans, Infant, Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Psychometrics, Self Care},
	isbn = {0003-9993 (Print)},
	author = {Haley, S. M. and Ni, P. and Ludlow, L. H. and Fragala-Pinkham, M. A.}
}
@article {87,
	title = {Refining the conceptual basis for rehabilitation outcome measurement: personal care and instrumental activities domain},
	journal = {Medical Care},
	volume = {42},
	number = {1 Suppl},
	year = {2004},
	note = {0025-7079Journal Article},
	month = {Jan},
	pages = {I62-172},
	abstract = {BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation outcome measures routinely include content on performance of daily activities; however, the conceptual basis for item selection is rarely specified. These instruments differ significantly in format, number, and specificity of daily activity items and in the measurement dimensions and type of scale used to specify levels of performance. We propose that a requirement for upper limb and hand skills underlies many activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) items in current instruments, and that items selected based on this definition can be placed along a single functional continuum. OBJECTIVE: To examine the dimensional structure and content coverage of a Personal Care and Instrumental Activities item set and to examine the comparability of items from existing instruments and a set of new items as measures of this domain. METHODS: Participants (N = 477) from 3 different disability groups and 4 settings representing the continuum of postacute rehabilitation care were administered the newly developed Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC), the SF-8, and an additional setting-specific measure: FIM (in-patient rehabilitation); MDS (skilled nursing facility); MDS-PAC (postacute settings); OASIS (home care); or PF-10 (outpatient clinic). Rasch (partial-credit model) analyses were conducted on a set of 62 items covering the Personal Care and Instrumental domain to examine item fit, item functioning, and category difficulty estimates and unidimensionality. RESULTS: After removing 6 misfitting items, the remaining 56 items fit acceptably along the hypothesized continuum. Analyses yielded different difficulty estimates for the maximum score (eg, "Independent performance") for items with comparable content from different instruments. Items showed little differential item functioning across age, diagnosis, or severity groups, and 92\% of the participants fit the model. CONCLUSIONS: ADL and IADL items from existing rehabilitation outcomes instruments that depend on skilled upper limb and hand use can be located along a single continuum, along with the new personal care and instrumental items of the AM-PAC addressing gaps in content. Results support the validity of the proposed definition of the Personal Care and Instrumental Activities dimension of function as a guide for future development of rehabilitation outcome instruments, such as linked, setting-specific short forms and computerized adaptive testing approaches.},
	keywords = {*Self Efficacy, *Sickness Impact Profile, Activities of Daily Living/*classification/psychology, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Disability Evaluation, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome Assessment (Health Care)/*methods/statistics \& numerical data, Questionnaires/*standards, Recovery of Function/physiology, Rehabilitation/*standards/statistics \& numerical data, Reproducibility of Results, Research Support, U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t, Non-P.H.S., Research Support, U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t, P.H.S., Sensitivity and Specificity},
	author = {Coster, W. J. and Haley, S. M. and Andres, P. L. and Ludlow, L. H. and Bond, T. L. and Ni, P. S.}
}
