» Articles » PMID: 19216054

Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory/Rasch Model to Assess Differences Between Patient-reported Fatigue Using 7-day and 4-week Recall Periods

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Public Health
Date 2009 Feb 14
PMID 19216054
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: This study compared self-reported fatigue between 7-day and 4-week time frames and explored factors that affect patients' responses.

Study Design And Setting: Two hundred and sixteen cancer patients completed either 7-day or 4-week version of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F). Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel statistics and Cochran-Armitage trend tests were used to assess the association between time frame and item scores. Information function curves at both item and scale levels were depicted to evaluate the precision along the fatigue continuum. Differential item functioning (DIF) was used to examine the stability of the psychometric properties between time frames.

Results: Time frame did not influence patients' item responses. Examination of information function curves at item level did not clearly favor either time frame. At the scale level, the 7-day time frame was slightly more precise overall than the 4-week time frame. No item demonstrated DIF between time frames. Neither gender nor fatigue severity had an impact on above results.

Conclusion: This study suggests 7-day and 4-week time frame are equally appropriate in measuring fatigue, preference might be given to the more informative 7-day time frame. However, substantive considerations regarding the appropriate time frame should outweigh statistical ones.

Citing Articles

Development and assessment of the health-related quality of life scale for children with hearing loss in China.

Liu J, Wang Y, Li J, Wu D, Zeng G, Cheng J BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):39.

PMID: 39762793 PMC: 11702205. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-21240-y.


Development of the psychopathological vulnerability index for screening at-risk youths: a Rasch model approach.

Liao Y, Shen H, Duan W, Cui S, Zheng C, Liu R Npj Ment Health Res. 2024; 3(1):60.

PMID: 39623039 PMC: 11612436. DOI: 10.1038/s44184-024-00106-6.


Comparing estimates of psychological distress using 7-day and 30-day recall periods: Does it make a difference?.

Chilver M, Burns R, Botha F, Butterworth P PLoS One. 2023; 18(12):e0295535.

PMID: 38064444 PMC: 10707700. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295535.


Development and psychometric validation of the Pandemic-Related Traumatic Stress Scale for children and adults.

Blackwell C, Sherlock P, Jackson K, Hofheimer J, Cella D, Algermissen M Psychol Assess. 2023; 35(11):1054-1067.

PMID: 37902671 PMC: 10773574. DOI: 10.1037/pas0001211.


A comparison of brief versus explicit descriptors for verbal rating scales: interrupted time series design.

Vickers A, Assel M, Hannon M, Desai P, Carlsson S, McCready T Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023; 21(1):105.

PMID: 37705045 PMC: 10498613. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-023-02184-0.


References
1.
Lai J, Dineen K, Reeve B, Von Roenn J, Shervin D, McGuire M . An item response theory-based pain item bank can enhance measurement precision. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005; 30(3):278-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.03.009. View

2.
Mendoza T, Wang X, Cleeland C, Morrissey M, Johnson B, Wendt J . The rapid assessment of fatigue severity in cancer patients: use of the Brief Fatigue Inventory. Cancer. 1999; 85(5):1186-96. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19990301)85:5<1186::aid-cncr24>3.0.co;2-n. View

3.
Cella D, Lai J, Chang C, Peterman A, Slavin M . Fatigue in cancer patients compared with fatigue in the general United States population. Cancer. 2002; 94(2):528-38. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.10245. View

4.
Redelmeier D, Kahneman D . Patients' memories of painful medical treatments: real-time and retrospective evaluations of two minimally invasive procedures. Pain. 1996; 66(1):3-8. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(96)02994-6. View

5.
Beese A, Morley S . Memory for acute pain experience is specifically inaccurate but generally reliable. Pain. 1993; 53(2):183-189. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(93)90079-5. View