Original article
Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-40): II. Comparison of relative precision using Likert and Rasch scoring methods

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00424-6Get rights and content

Abstract

This study examined the relative precision (RP) of two methods of scoring the 10-item Physical Functioning Scale (PF-10) from a large sample of patients (n = 3445) of the Medical Outcomes Study. Based on a Likert scaling model, the PF-10 summated scoring method was compared with a Rasch Item Response Theory (IRT) scaling model in which raw scores were transformed into a latent trait variable of physical functioning. Potential differences between scoring methods were hypothesized to be attributed to: (1) the logarithmic nature of the Rasch transformation; (2) the unevenness of the PF-10 item distributions; and (3) reduction of within-group variance. RP ratios favored the Rasch model in discriminating between patients who differed in disease severity. The Rasch and Likert scoring models performed similarly for tests involving sensitivity to change over a two-year follow-up period. In all comparisons, differences between methods were most apparent in clinical groups whose scores most approximated the extremes of the score distribution. Further research is necessary to test for differences between scoring models in discrimination and sensitivity to change among clinical groups whose scores are sufficiently spread across the continuum of physical functioning, in particular patients with either very high or low physical functioning. The Rasch model of scoring may have important implications for the clinical interpretation of individual scores at all ranges of the scale.

References (55)

  • JE Ware et al.

    The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection

    Med Care

    (1992)
  • R Likert

    A technique for the measurement of attitudes

    Arch Psychol

    (1932)
  • C McHorney et al.

    The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups

    Med Care

    (1994)
  • RH Brook et al.

    Overview of adult health status measures fielded in RAND's Health Insurance Study

    Med Care

    (1979)
  • GR Parkerson et al.

    The Duke- UNC Health Profile: An adult health status instrument for primary care

    Med Care

    (1981)
  • AM Jette et al.

    The Functional Status Questionnaire: Reliability and validity when used in primary care

    J Gen Intern Med

    (1986)
  • LW Chambers

    The McMaster Health Index Questionnaire: An update

  • AL Stewart et al.

    The MOS Short-Form General Health Survey: Reliability and validity in a patient population

    Med Care

    (1988)
  • GR Parkerson et al.

    The Duke Health Profile: A 17-item measure of health and dysfunction

    Med Care

    (1990)
  • C Merbitz et al.

    Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference

    Arch Phys Med Rehabil

    (1989)
  • WP Fisher

    Measurement-related problems in functional assessment

    Am J Occup Ther

    (1993)
  • B Silverstein et al.

    Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation: I. Exploring unidimensionality

    Arch Phys Med Rehabil

    (1991)
  • B Silverstein et al.

    Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation: II. Defining interval measures

    Arch Phys Med Rehabil

    (1992)
  • BD Wright et al.
  • D Andrich
  • RK Hambleton et al.
  • JC Nunnally
  • Cited by (0)

    Supported in part by a grant from the Functional Outcomes Program of the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation at the Health Institute, New England Medical Center Hospitals, Boston, MA (Grant Number 91-013) and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

    View full text