Making Rasch decisions: the use of Rasch analysis in the construction of preference based health related quality of life instruments

Young, Tracey A. and Yang, Y and Brazier, J and Tsuchiya, A and Coyne, K (2008): Making Rasch decisions: the use of Rasch analysis in the construction of preference based health related quality of life instruments. Published in: Quality of Life Research , Vol. 18, No. 2 (2009): pp. 253-265.

Abstract

Objective: To set out the methodological process for using Rasch analysis alongside traditional psychometric methods in the development of a health state classification that is amenable to valuation.

Methods: The overactive bladder questionnaire is used to illustrate a four step process for deriving a reduced health state classification from an existing nonpreference based health related quality of life instrument. Step I excludes items that do not meet the initial validation process and step II uses criteria based on Rasch analysis and psychometric testing to select the final items for the health state classification. In step III, item levels are examined and Rasch analysis is used to explore the possibility of reducing the number of item levels. Step IV repeats steps I to III on alternative data sets in order to validate the selection of items for the health state classification.

Conclusions: The techniques described enable the construction of a health state classification amenable for valuation exercises that will allow the derivation of preference weights. Thus, the health related quality of life of patients with conditions, like overactive bladder, can be valued and quality adjustment weights such as quality adjusted life years derived.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Rasch analysis; health related quality of life; condition specific measure; preference-based measures; overactive bladder syndrome
• Subjects: I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I3 - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty > I31 - General Welfare, Well-Being; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I19 - Other

References

Brooks R (1996). EQ-5D: the current state of play. Health Policy 37:53-72.

Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al (2002). Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Med Care 40:113-28.

Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics 21(2):271-92.

Marra CA. Woolcott JC. Kopec JA, et al (2005). A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Social Science & Medicine 60(7):1571-82.

Brazier JE, Deverill M, Harper R, Booth A (1999). A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 3(9).

Coast J (1992). Reprocessing data to form QALYs. BMJ 305(6845):87-90.

Fryback DG, Dasbach EJ, Klein R et al (1993). The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study: initial catalogue of health-state quality factors. Med Decis Making 13:89-102.

Nichol MB, Sengupta N, Globe DR (2001). Evaluating quality adjusted life-years: estimation of the Health Utility Index (HUI2) from the SF-36. Med Decis Making 21:105-12.

Tsuchiya A, Brazier J, McColl E, Parkin D (2002). Deriving preference-based condition-specific instruments: converting AQLQ into EQ-5D indices. Health Economics and Decision Science Discussion Paper Series No 02/01. Accessed from: http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/87/47/DP0201.pdf

Brazier J, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A (2007). Review of methods for mapping between measures of health related quality of life onto generic preference-based measures: a road to nowhere? (Paper presented at the Health Economics Study Group Meeting, Brunel University, Uxbridge)

Gray A, Rivero-Arias O, Clarke PM (2006). Estimating the association between SF-12 responses and EQ-5D utility calues by response mapping. Med Decis Making 26:18-29.

Brazier J, Usherwood T, Harper R, Thomas K (1998). Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol 51(11):1115-28.

Rasch G (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Reprinted 1980.

Brazier J, Roberts J (2005). Estimation of a preference based index measure of health for the SF-12 and comparison to the SF-36. Medical Care 42(9):851-9.

Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M et al (2002). The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardization Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 21:167–78.

Kobelt G, Kirchberger I, Malone-Lee J (1999). Quality-of-life aspects of the overactive bladder and the effect of treatment with tolterodine. BJU International 83(6):583-90.

Coyne KS, Matza LS, Thompson CL (2005). The responsiveness of the overactive bladder questionnaire (OAB-q). Qual Life Res 14(3):849-55.

Coyne K, Revicki D, Hunt T, et al (2002). Psychometric validation of an overactive bladder symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaire: the OAB-q. Qual Life Res 11(6):563-74.

19. Matza LS, Thompson CL, Krasnow J, Brewster-Jordan J, Zyczynski T, Coyne KS (2005). Test-retest reliability of four questionnaires for patients with overactive bladder: the overactive bladder questionnaire (OAB-q), patient perception of bladder condition (PPBC), urgency questionnaire (UQ), and the primary OAB symptom questionnaire (POSQ). Neurourology & Urodynamics 24(3):215-25.

Siami P Seidman LS, Lama D (2002). A multicentre, prospective, open-label study of tolterodine extended-release 4mg for overactive bladder: the speed of onset of therapeutic assessment trial (STAT). Clin Ther 24(4):616-28.

Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S, Perera S. (2003) Glycine antagonist in neuroprotection Americans investigators. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 84(7):950-63.

Gilworth G, Chamberlain MA, Bhakta B, Haskard D, Silman A, Tennant A (2004). Development of the BD-HRQL: a quality of life measure specific to Behcet’s disease. J Rheumatol 31(5):931-7.

Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB (2004). The quality of life impact of refractive correction (QIRC) questionnaire: development and validation. Optom Vis Sci 81(10):769-77.

Raczek AE, Ware JE, Bjorner JB, Gandek B, Haley SM, Aaronson NK, et al (1998). Comparison of Rasch and summated rating scales constructed from SF-36 physical functioning items in seven countries: Results from the IHRQLA project. J Clin Epidemiol 15(11):1203-14.

White LJ, Velozo CA (2002). The use of Rasch measurement to improve the Oswestry classification scheme. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83(6):822-31.

Valderas JM, Alonso J, Prieto L (2004). Content-based interpretation aids for health-related quality of life measures in clinical practice. An example for the visual function index (VF-14). Qual Life Res 13(1):35-44.

Chatfield C, Collins AJ (1980). Introduction to multivariate analysis. Chapman and Hall: University Press, Cambridge.

Tennant A, McKenna SP, Hagell P (2004). Application of Rasch analysis in the development and application of quality of life instruments. Value in Health 7(Supplement 1):S22-S26.

Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR (2002). Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 77(4):371–83.