Rasch Analysis of Social Attitude Barriers and Facilitators to Participation for Individuals with Disabilities

Overview

Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil

Specialty Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2020 Nov 23

PMID 33223007

Citations 1

Authors

Alex W K Wong

Sofia F Garcia

Elizabeth A Hahn

Patrick Semik

Jin-Shei Lai

Susan Magasi

Joy Hammel

Kristian P Nitsch

Ana Miskovic

Allen W Heinemann

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To develop item banks of social attitude barriers and facilitators to participation and validate them with established instruments.

Design: We used the Rasch model to identify misfitting items and rating scale problems, calibrate items, and develop KeyForms and short forms. Correlations between the Social Attitude Barriers and Facilitators item banks with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Social Health domain and National Institutes of Health Toolbox Emotional Battery Social Relationships domain were computed to evaluate convergent and divergent validity.

Setting: Community-dwelling individuals traveled to 3 academic medical centers for testing.

Participants: Participants (N=558) who had a primary impairment of stroke, spinal cord injury, or traumatic brain injury (mean age, 47.0±16.0y) completed 31 social attitude facilitator and 51 barrier items using a 5-point rating scale.

Interventions: Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures: Item banks to measure social attitude barriers and facilitators for individuals with disabilities.

Results: After combining the "never" and "rarely" rating scale categories, 30 Facilitator items fit the Rasch model and demonstrated person reliability of 0.93. After collapsing the "never" and "rarely" rating scale categories, 45 Barrier items fit the Rasch model and demonstrated person reliability of 0.95. Ceiling and floor effects were negligible for both item banks. Facilitators and Barriers item banks were negatively correlated, and these banks were moderately correlated with PROMIS and Toolbox measures, providing evidence of convergent and divergent validity.

Conclusions: Findings support the reliability and validity of the Social Attitude Facilitators and Barriers item banks. These item banks allow investigators and clinicians to measure perceptions of social attitudes, providing information that can guide individual interventions to reduce barriers and promote facilitators. Moderate correlations between the Social Attitude banks and PROMIS and Toolbox variables provide support for the measurement and theory of environmental influences on social health and participation.

Citing Articles

Development of the German social attitude barriers and facilitators to participation-scales: an analysis according to the Rasch model.

Upegui-Arango L, Mainz V, Gecht J, Mueller C, Quack V, Heinemann A BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1):423.

PMID: 35524254 PMC: 9074200. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05339-0.

References

Hammel J, Magasi S, Heinemann A, Gray D, Stark S, Kisala P . Environmental barriers and supports to everyday participation: a qualitative insider perspective from people with disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015; 96(4):578-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.12.008. View

Garcia S, Hahn E, Magasi S, Lai J, Semik P, Hammel J . Development of self-report measures of social attitudes that act as environmental barriers and facilitators for people with disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014; 96(4):596-603. PMC: 4297740. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.06.019. View

Dunn D, Burcaw S . Disability identity: exploring narrative accounts of disability. Rehabil Psychol. 2013; 58(2):148-57. DOI: 10.1037/a0031691. View

Wong A, Ng S, Dashner J, Baum M, Hammel J, Magasi S . Relationships between environmental factors and participation in adults with traumatic brain injury, stroke, and spinal cord injury: a cross-sectional multi-center study. Qual Life Res. 2017; 26(10):2633-2645. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-017-1586-5. View

Whiteneck G, Harrison-Felix C, Mellick D, Brooks C, Charlifue S, Gerhart K . Quantifying environmental factors: a measure of physical, attitudinal, service, productivity, and policy barriers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004; 85(8):1324-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.09.027. View

Bailey I, Lovie J . New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1976; 53(11):740-5. DOI: 10.1097/00006324-197611000-00006. View

DeWalt D, Rothrock N, Yount S, Stone A . Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review. Med Care. 2007; 45(5 Suppl 1):S12-21. PMC: 2810630. DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000254567.79743.e2. View

Olkin R, Pledger C . Can disability studies and psychology join hands?. Am Psychol. 2003; 58(4):296-304. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066x.58.4.296. View

Babakhanyan I, McKenna B, Casaletto K, Nowinski C, Heaton R . National Institutes of Health Toolbox Emotion Battery for English- and Spanish-speaking adults: normative data and factor-based summary scores. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2018; 9:115-127. PMC: 5859895. DOI: 10.2147/PROM.S151658. View

10.

Hammel J, Magasi S, Heinemann A, Whiteneck G, Bogner J, Rodriguez E . What does participation mean? An insider perspective from people with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2008; 30(19):1445-60. DOI: 10.1080/09638280701625534. View

11.

Enderby P, Wood V, Wade D, Hewer R . The Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test: a short, simple test for aphasia appropriate for non-specialists. Int Rehabil Med. 1987; 8(4):166-70. DOI: 10.3109/03790798709166209. View

12.

Heinemann A, Magasi S, Hammel J, Carlozzi N, Garcia S, Hahn E . Environmental factors item development for persons with stroke, traumatic brain injury, and spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014; 96(4):589-95. PMC: 4593403. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.11.024. View

13.

Whiteneck G, Dijkers M . Difficult to measure constructs: conceptual and methodological issues concerning participation and environmental factors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009; 90(11 Suppl):S22-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.06.009. View

14.

Marmot M, Friel S, Bell R, Houweling T, Taylor S . Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Lancet. 2008; 372(9650):1661-9. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61690-6. View

15.

Charles E . The correction for attenuation due to measurement error: clarifying concepts and creating confidence sets. Psychol Methods. 2005; 10(2):206-26. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.10.2.206. View

16.

Linacre J . Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. J Appl Meas. 2002; 3(1):85-106. View

17.

Magasi S, Wong A, Gray D, Hammel J, Baum C, Wang C . Theoretical foundations for the measurement of environmental factors and their impact on participation among people with disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015; 96(4):569-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.12.002. View

18.

Velozo C, Woodbury M . Translating measurement findings into rehabilitation practice: an example using Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity with patients following stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012; 48(10):1211-22. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2010.10.0203. View

19.

Castel L, Williams K, Bosworth H, Eisen S, Hahn E, Irwin D . Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: a qualitative analysis of focus-group data. Qual Life Res. 2008; 17(5):737-49. PMC: 2757448. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-008-9352-3. View

20.

Hahn E, DeWalt D, Bode R, Garcia S, DeVellis R, Correia H . New English and Spanish social health measures will facilitate evaluating health determinants. Health Psychol. 2014; 33(5):490-9. PMC: 4159098. DOI: 10.1037/hea0000055. View