Adjusting for cross-cultural differences in computer-adaptive tests of quality of life

Abstract

PurposePrevious studies using the WHOQOL measures have demonstrated that the relationship between individual items and the underlying quality of life (QoL) construct may differ between cultures. If unaccounted for, these differing relationships can lead to measurement bias which, in turn, can undermine the reliability of results.MethodsWe used item response theory (IRT) to assess differential item functioning (DIF) in WHOQOL data from diverse language versions collected in UK, Zimbabwe, Russia, and India (total N = 1332). Data were fitted to the partial credit ‘Rasch’ model. We used four item banks previously derived from the WHOQOL-100 measure, which provided excellent measurement for physical, psychological, social, and environmental quality of life domains (40 items overall). Cross-cultural differential item functioning was assessed using analysis of variance for item residuals and post hoc Tukey tests. Simulated computer-adaptive tests (CATs) were conducted to assess the efficiency and precision of the four items banks.ResultsSplitting item parameters by DIF results in four linked item banks without DIF or other breaches of IRT model assumptions. Simulated CATs were more precise and efficient than longer paper-based alternatives.DiscussionAssessing differential item functioning using item response theory can identify measurement invariance between cultures which, if uncontrolled, may undermine accurate comparisons in computer-adaptive testing assessments of QoL. We demonstrate how compensating for DIF using item anchoring allowed data from all four countries to be compared on a common metric, thus facilitating assessments which were both sensitive to cultural nuance and comparable between countries.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-017-1738-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health-Related Quality of Life of Persons with Direct, Indirect and No Migration Background in Germany: A Cross-Sectional Study Based on the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)

“…In addition, those persons with migration background seem to be better off with respect to mental HrQoL compared with persons without migration background and probably also compared with older migrant generations. A possible explanation for the difference in physical and mental HrQoL might be that there is a certain probability of interpreting the meaning and answering items of the SF-12 in a different way by persons with different nationalities [ 38 , 39 ]. Furthermore, the lower physical HrQoL might be affected by unknown migration-specific characteristics or an inadequate access to healthcare services for persons with migration background [ 40 ].…”

A narrative review of current evidence supporting the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures in the management of chronic diseases

“…54 – 56 With the expansion of ePROMs, the expansion of CATs and other methods to improve survey design and reduce survey burden should be considered. 57 , 58 …”

Health-Related Quality of Life in Sarcoidosis

“…55,56 They are self-administered questionnaires that assess a patient's subjective feeling of wellbeing, perception of relevant physical symptoms, and their opinion of the impact of disease on their QoL. 55,[57][58][59] PROMs should be approved by the Food and Drug Administration Agency prior to implementation and should be reliable, valid, and able to detect change. 55 Detailed discussions of these concepts are beyond the scope of this paper, and a brief description is provided below and summarized in ►Table 1.…”