01768nas a2200157   4500008004100000020002300041245020500064210006900269300001200338490000700350520108200357100001501439700001601454700001601470856012401486       2010                        eng d  a0146-62161552-349700aA comparison of content-balancing procedures for estimating multiple clinical domains in computerized adaptive testing: Relative precision, validity, and detection of persons with misfitting responses0 acomparison of contentbalancing procedures for estimating multipl  a410-4230 v343 aThis simulation study sought to compare four different computerized adaptive testing (CAT) content-balancing procedures designed for use in a multidimensional assessment with respect to measurement precision, symptom severity classification, validity of clinical diagnostic recommendations, and sensitivity to atypical responding. The four content-balancing procedures were (a) no content balancing, (b) screener-based, (c) mixed (screener plus content balancing), and (d) full content balancing. In full content balancing and in mixed content balancing following administration of the screener items, item selection was based on (a) whether the target numberof items for the item’s subscale was reached and (b) the item’s information function. Mixed and full content balancing provided the best representation of items from each of the main subscales of the Internal Mental Distress Scale. These procedures also resulted in higher CAT to full-scale correlations for the Trauma and Homicidal/Suicidal Thought subscales and improved detection of atypical responding.Keywords1 aRiley, B B1 aDennis, M L1 aConrad, K J  uhttp://mail.iacat.org/content/comparison-content-balancing-procedures-estimating-multiple-clinical-domains-computerized01723nas a2200169   4500008004100000245016600041210006900207300001000276490000600286520105700292653001501349100001501364700001601379700001701395700001601412856012501428       2007                        eng d00aRelative precision, efficiency and construct validity of different starting and stopping rules for a computerized adaptive test: The GAIN Substance Problem Scale0 aRelative precision efficiency and construct validity of differen  a48-650 v83 aSubstance abuse treatment programs are being pressed to measure and make clinical decisions more efficiently about an increasing array of problems. This computerized adaptive testing (CAT) simulation examined the relative efficiency, precision and construct validity of different starting and stopping rules used to shorten the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs’ (GAIN) Substance Problem Scale (SPS) and facilitate diagnosis based on it. Data came from 1,048 adolescents and adults referred to substance abuse treatment centers in 5 sites. CAT performance was evaluated using: (1) average standard errors, (2) average number of items, (3) bias in personmeasures, (4) root mean squared error of person measures, (5) Cohen’s kappa to evaluate CAT classification compared to clinical classification, (6) correlation between CAT and full-scale measures, and (7) construct validity of CAT classification vs. clinical classification using correlations with five theoretically associated instruments. Results supported both CAT efficiency and validity.10aMy article1 aRiley, B B1 aConrad, K J1 aBezruczko, N1 aDennis, M L  uhttp://mail.iacat.org/content/relative-precision-efficiency-and-construct-validity-different-starting-and-stopping-rules00587nas a2200121   4500008004100000245011800041210006900159260006500228100001600293700001500309700001600324856012500340       2007                        eng d00aThe use of computerized adaptive testing to assess psychopathology using the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs0 ause of computerized adaptive testing to assess psychopathology u  aPortland, OR USAbAmerican Evaluation Association cNovember1 aConrad, K J1 aRiley, B B1 aDennis, M L  uhttp://mail.iacat.org/content/use-computerized-adaptive-testing-assess-psychopathology-using-global-appraisal-individual