03309nas a2200433   4500008004100000020004600041245007700087210006900164250001500233260001100248300001200259490000700271520203200278653002702310653003002337653002102367653001002388653000902398653001502407653003602422653002102458653004402479653002402523653001102547653001102558653001302569653000902582653001602591653003002607653003002637653003102667100001502698700001302713700001502726700001402741700001502755700001402770856009102784       2008                        eng d  a1528-1159 (Electronic)0362-2436 (Linking)00aComputerized adaptive testing in back pain: Validation of the CAT-5D-QOL0 aComputerized adaptive testing in back pain Validation of the CAT  a2008/05/23  cMay 20  a1384-900 v333 aSTUDY DESIGN: We have conducted an outcome instrument validation study. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to develop a computerized adaptive test (CAT) to measure 5 domains of health-related quality of life (HRQL) and assess its feasibility, reliability, validity, and efficiency. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Kopec and colleagues have recently developed item response theory based item banks for 5 domains of HRQL relevant to back pain and suitable for CAT applications. The domains are Daily Activities (DAILY), Walking (WALK), Handling Objects (HAND), Pain or Discomfort (PAIN), and Feelings (FEEL). METHODS: An adaptive algorithm was implemented in a web-based questionnaire administration system. The questionnaire included CAT-5D-QOL (5 scales), Modified Oswestry Disability Index (MODI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), SF-36 Health Survey, and standard clinical and demographic information. Participants were outpatients treated for mechanical back pain at a referral center in Vancouver, Canada. RESULTS: A total of 215 patients completed the questionnaire and 84 completed a retest. On average, patients answered 5.2 items per CAT-5D-QOL scale. Reliability ranged from 0.83 (FEEL) to 0.92 (PAIN) and was 0.92 for the MODI, RMDQ, and Physical Component Summary (PCS-36). The ceiling effect was 0.5% for PAIN compared with 2% for MODI and 5% for RMQ. The CAT-5D-QOL scales correlated as anticipated with other measures of HRQL and discriminated well according to the level of satisfaction with current symptoms, duration of the last episode, sciatica, and disability compensation. The average relative discrimination index was 0.87 for PAIN, 0.67 for DAILY and 0.62 for WALK, compared with 0.89 for MODI, 0.80 for RMDQ, and 0.59 for PCS-36. CONCLUSION: The CAT-5D-QOL is feasible, reliable, valid, and efficient in patients with back pain. This methodology can be recommended for use in back pain research and should improve outcome assessment, facilitate comparisons across studies, and reduce patient burden.10a*Disability Evaluation10a*Health Status Indicators10a*Quality of Life10aAdult10aAged10aAlgorithms10aBack Pain/*diagnosis/psychology10aBritish Columbia10aDiagnosis, Computer-Assisted/*standards10aFeasibility Studies10aFemale10aHumans10aInternet10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aPredictive Value of Tests10aQuestionnaires/*standards10aReproducibility of Results1 aKopec, J A1 aBadii, M1 aMcKenna, M1 aLima, V D1 aSayre, E C1 aDvorak, M  uhttp://iacat.org/content/computerized-adaptive-testing-back-pain-validation-cat-5d-qol03228nas a2200397   4500008004100000020002700041245014200068210006900210250001500279260001100294300001200305490000700317520193600324653002702260653003002287653001002317653000902327653002202336653003602358653001602394653002402410653004402434653001102478653001602489653002602505653003002531653003002561653003102591100001302622700001402635700001502649700001402664700001702678700001502695856012002710       2008                        eng d  a1528-1159 (Electronic)00aLetting the CAT out of the bag: Comparing computer adaptive tests and an 11-item short form of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire0 aLetting the CAT out of the bag Comparing computer adaptive tests  a2008/05/23  cMay 20  a1378-830 v333 aSTUDY DESIGN: A post hoc simulation of a computer adaptive administration of the items of a modified version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of adaptive administration of back pain-related disability items compared with a fixed 11-item short form. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Short form versions of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire have been developed. An alternative to paper-and-pencil short forms is to administer items adaptively so that items are presented based on a person's responses to previous items. Theoretically, this allows precise estimation of back pain disability with administration of only a few items. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were gathered from 2 previously conducted studies of persons with back pain. An item response theory model was used to calibrate scores based on all items, items of a paper-and-pencil short form, and several computer adaptive tests (CATs). RESULTS: Correlations between each CAT condition and scores based on a 23-item version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire ranged from 0.93 to 0.98. Compared with an 11-item short form, an 11-item CAT produced scores that were significantly more highly correlated with scores based on the 23-item scale. CATs with even fewer items also produced scores that were highly correlated with scores based on all items. For example, scores from a 5-item CAT had a correlation of 0.93 with full scale scores. Seven- and 9-item CATs correlated at 0.95 and 0.97, respectively. A CAT with a standard-error-based stopping rule produced scores that correlated at 0.95 with full scale scores. CONCLUSION: A CAT-based back pain-related disability measure may be a valuable tool for use in clinical and research contexts. Use of CAT for other common measures in back pain research, such as other functional scales or measures of psychological distress, may offer similar advantages.10a*Disability Evaluation10a*Health Status Indicators10aAdult10aAged10aAged, 80 and over10aBack Pain/*diagnosis/psychology10aCalibration10aComputer Simulation10aDiagnosis, Computer-Assisted/*standards10aHumans10aMiddle Aged10aModels, Psychological10aPredictive Value of Tests10aQuestionnaires/*standards10aReproducibility of Results1 aCook, KF1 aChoi, S W1 aCrane, P K1 aDeyo, R A1 aJohnson, K L1 aAmtmann, D  uhttp://iacat.org/content/letting-cat-out-bag-comparing-computer-adaptive-tests-and-11-item-short-form-roland-morris02027nas a2200253   4500008004100000245007700041210006900118260001200187300001200199490000700211520125800218653003901476653002901515653001501544653001001559653001101569653001101580653000901591653003001600653001301630100001601643700002001659856009401679       2001                        eng d00aNCLEX-RN performance: predicting success on the computerized examination0 aNCLEXRN performance predicting success on the computerized exami  cJul-Aug  a158-1650 v173 aSince the adoption of the Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) format of the National Certification Licensure Examination for Registered Nurses (NCLEX-RN), no studies have been reported in the literature on predictors of successful performance by baccalaureate nursing graduates on the licensure examination. In this study, a discriminant analysis was used to identify which of 21 variables can be significant predictors of success on the CAT NCLEX-RN. The convenience sample consisted of 289 individuals who graduated from a baccalaureate nursing program between 1995 and 1998. Seven significant predictor variables were identified. The total number of C+ or lower grades earned in nursing theory courses was the best predictor, followed by grades in several individual nursing courses. More than 93 per cent of graduates were correctly classified. Ninety-four per cent of NCLEX "passes" were correctly classified, as were 92 per cent of NCLEX failures. This degree of accuracy in classifying CAT NCLEX-RN failures represents a marked improvement over results reported in previous studies of licensure examinations, and suggests the discriminant function will be helpful in identifying future students in danger of failure. J Prof Nurs 17:158-165, 2001.10a*Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate10a*Educational Measurement10a*Licensure10aAdult10aFemale10aHumans10aMale10aPredictive Value of Tests10aSoftware1 aBeeman, P B1 aWaterhouse, J K  uhttp://iacat.org/content/nclex-rn-performance-predicting-success-computerized-examination01906nas a2200229   4500008004100000245008600041210006900127300001000196490000700206520111400213653003201327653003701359653001001396653003401406653003001440653002901470653003201499100001601531700001801547700001301565856009801578       1999                        eng d00aThe use of Rasch analysis to produce scale-free measurement of functional ability0 ause of Rasch analysis to produce scalefree measurement of functi  a83-900 v533 aInnovative applications of Rasch analysis can lead to solutions for traditional measurement problems and can produce new assessment applications in occupational therapy and health care practice. First, Rasch analysis is a mechanism that translates scores across similar functional ability assessments, thus enabling the comparison of functional ability outcomes measured by different instruments. This will allow for the meaningful tracking of functional ability outcomes across the continuum of care. Second, once the item-difficulty order of an instrument or item bank is established by Rasch analysis, computerized adaptive testing can be used to target items to the patient's ability level, reducing assessment length by as much as one half. More importantly, Rasch analysis can provide the foundation for "equiprecise" measurement or the potential to have precise measurement across all levels of functional ability. The use of Rasch analysis to create scale-free measurement of functional ability demonstrates how this methodlogy can be used in practical applications of clinical and outcome assessment.10a*Activities of Daily Living10aDisabled Persons/*classification10aHuman10aOccupational Therapy/*methods10aPredictive Value of Tests10aQuestionnaires/standards10aSensitivity and Specificity1 aVelozo, C A1 aKielhofner, G1 aLai, J-S  uhttp://iacat.org/content/use-rasch-analysis-produce-scale-free-measurement-functional-ability