This article addresses the issue of how to detect item preknowledge using item response time data in two computer-based large-scale licensure examinations. Item preknowledge is indicated by an unexpected short response time and a correct response. Two samples were used for detecting item preknowledge for each examination. The first sample was from the early stage of the operational test and was used for item calibration. The second sample was from the late stage of the operational test, which may feature item preknowledge. The purpose of this research was to explore whether there was evidence of item preknowledge and compromised items in the second sample using the parameters estimated from the first sample. The results showed that for one nonadaptive operational examination, two items (of 111) were potentially exposed, and two candidates (of 1,172) showed some indications of preknowledge on multiple items. For another licensure examination that featured computerized adaptive testing, there was no indication of item preknowledge or compromised items. Implications for detected aberrant examinees and compromised items are discussed in the article.

Our objective was to examine dimensionality and item-level performance of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) across time using classical and modern test theory approaches. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Item Response Theory (IRT) analyses were conducted using data from patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) Pooled Resources Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials (PRO-ACT) database with complete ALSFRS-R data (n = 888) at three time-points (Time 0, Time 1 (6-months), Time 2 (1-year)). Results demonstrated that in this population of 888 patients, mean age was 54.6 years, 64.4% were male, and 93.7% were Caucasian. The CFA supported a 4* individual-domain structure (bulbar, gross motor, fine motor, and respiratory domains). IRT analysis within each domain revealed misfitting items and overlapping item response category thresholds at all time-points, particularly in the gross motor and respiratory domain items. Results indicate that many of the items of the ALSFRS-R may sub-optimally distinguish among varying levels of disability assessed by each domain, particularly in patients with less severe disability. Measure performance improved across time as patient disability severity increased. In conclusion, modifications to select ALSFRS-R items may improve the instrument's specificity to disability level and sensitivity to treatment effects.

Background. The Self-Assessment of Treatment version II (SAT II) measures treatment-related improvements in pain and impacts and impressions of treatment in neuropathic pain patients. The measure has baseline and follow-up versions. This study assesses the measurement properties of the SAT II. Methods. Data from 369 painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) patients from a phase III trial assessing capsaicin 8% patch (Qutenza®) efficacy and safety were used in these analyses. Reliability, convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness (using the Brief Pain Inventory-Diabetic Neuropathy [BPI-DN] and Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]) analyses were conducted, and minimally important differences (MID) were estimated. Results. Exploratory factor analysis supported a one-factor solution for the six impact items. The SAT II has good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.96) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.62–0.88). Assessment of convergent validity showed moderate to strong correlations with change in other study endpoints. Scores varied significantly by level of pain intensity and sleep interference (p < 0.05) defined by the BPI-DN. Responsiveness was shown based on the PGIC. MID estimates ranged from 1.2 to 2.4 (pain improvement) and 1.0 to 2.0 (impact scores). Conclusions. The SAT II is a reliable and valid measure for assessing treatment improvement in PDPN patients.

No abstract

No abstract