比较昏迷恢复量表修订版(CRS-R)的不同项目诊断标准:一种由Rasch分析驱动的基于测量的方法

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.12.009
Serena Caselli, Matilde Leonardi, Francesca Giulia Magnani, Martina Cacciatore, Filippo Barbadoro, Camilla Ippoliti, Svend Kreiner, Leonardo Pellicciari, Fabio La Porta
{"title":"比较昏迷恢复量表修订版(CRS-R)的不同项目诊断标准:一种由Rasch分析驱动的基于测量的方法","authors":"Serena Caselli, Matilde Leonardi, Francesca Giulia Magnani, Martina Cacciatore, Filippo Barbadoro, Camilla Ippoliti, Svend Kreiner, Leonardo Pellicciari, Fabio La Porta","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2024.12.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(1) To replicate the assessment of the internal construct validity of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) within the Rasch Measurement Theory framework using a larger multicenter sample size and (2) to compare the different sets of item-level diagnostic criteria against the measurement ruler constructed from Rasch analysis to understand how those criteria relate to the overall level of persons' consciousness.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Multicenter retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Seven centers.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 380 inpatients with a disorder of consciousness with one or more observations, for a total sample of 1460 observations.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Not applicable.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure: </strong>CRS-R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We created 2 subsamples: a validation subsample of 1 randomized assessment per subject (N=380) and a confirmation subsample using the further available assessments per subject (N=347). The Rasch analyses, conducted on the validation subsample and replicated on the confirmation one, demonstrated adequate satisfaction of all the model's requirements, including monotonicity, unidimensionality, local independence, invariance (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>df</sub>=40.224; P=.020), and absence of significant differential item functioning across all person factors explored, including etiology. The reliability (Person Separation Index>0.870) was sufficient for individual person measurement, with the distinction of five Distinct Levels of Performance Ability. The CRS-R rulers based on the Rasch calibration allowed the visual comparison of the various sets of disorder of consciousness diagnostic criteria available, suggesting the possibility of a further refinement of these criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study improved the results of a previous Rasch analysis published in 2013. It delivered a new stable Rasch calibration of the CRS-R within the largest multicenter sample size available to date and without any differential item functioning by patient's etiology. The adopted measurement-based approach provided further insights into the diagnostic meaning of several score categories of the CRS-R, confirming previous findings and suggesting that \"automatic motor response\" (item: motor function) and \"object recognition\" (item: visual function) are likely to represent behavioral manifestations of MCS+ and eMCS, respectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the Different Sets of Item-Level Diagnostic Criteria of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R): A Measurement-Based Approach Driven by Rasch Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Serena Caselli, Matilde Leonardi, Francesca Giulia Magnani, Martina Cacciatore, Filippo Barbadoro, Camilla Ippoliti, Svend Kreiner, Leonardo Pellicciari, Fabio La Porta\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apmr.2024.12.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(1) To replicate the assessment of the internal construct validity of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) within the Rasch Measurement Theory framework using a larger multicenter sample size and (2) to compare the different sets of item-level diagnostic criteria against the measurement ruler constructed from Rasch analysis to understand how those criteria relate to the overall level of persons' consciousness.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Multicenter retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Seven centers.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 380 inpatients with a disorder of consciousness with one or more observations, for a total sample of 1460 observations.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Not applicable.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure: </strong>CRS-R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We created 2 subsamples: a validation subsample of 1 randomized assessment per subject (N=380) and a confirmation subsample using the further available assessments per subject (N=347). The Rasch analyses, conducted on the validation subsample and replicated on the confirmation one, demonstrated adequate satisfaction of all the model's requirements, including monotonicity, unidimensionality, local independence, invariance (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>df</sub>=40.224; P=.020), and absence of significant differential item functioning across all person factors explored, including etiology. The reliability (Person Separation Index>0.870) was sufficient for individual person measurement, with the distinction of five Distinct Levels of Performance Ability. The CRS-R rulers based on the Rasch calibration allowed the visual comparison of the various sets of disorder of consciousness diagnostic criteria available, suggesting the possibility of a further refinement of these criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study improved the results of a previous Rasch analysis published in 2013. It delivered a new stable Rasch calibration of the CRS-R within the largest multicenter sample size available to date and without any differential item functioning by patient's etiology. The adopted measurement-based approach provided further insights into the diagnostic meaning of several score categories of the CRS-R, confirming previous findings and suggesting that \\\"automatic motor response\\\" (item: motor function) and \\\"object recognition\\\" (item: visual function) are likely to represent behavioral manifestations of MCS+ and eMCS, respectively.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2024.12.009\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2024.12.009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:(1)利用更大的多中心样本量,在Rasch测量理论框架内重复评估昏迷恢复量表修订版(CRS-R)的内部结构效度;(2)比较不同的项目诊断标准与Rasch分析构建的测量标尺,了解这些标准与人的整体意识水平的关系。设计:多中心回顾性研究。设置:七个中心。参与者:380名有一个或多个观察值的意识障碍(DOC)住院患者,共1460个观察值。干预措施:不适用。主要结局指标:CRS-R。结果:我们创建了两个子样本:每个受试者随机评估的验证子样本(N=380)和使用每个受试者进一步可用评估的确认子样本(N=347)。对验证子样本进行了Rasch分析,并对确认子样本进行了重复分析,结果表明模型的单调性、单维性、局部独立性、不变性等要求都得到了充分满足(χ2df=40.224;p= 0.020),并且在包括病因在内的所有人因素中都没有显著的差异项目功能(DIF)。信度(人分离指数>.870)足以用于个人测量,具有五个不同水平的绩效能力的区分。基于Rasch校准的CRS-R标尺允许对各种可用的DOC诊断标准进行视觉比较,这表明这些标准有可能进一步完善。结论:这项研究改进了2013年发表的Rasch分析的结果。它在迄今为止最大的多中心样本量内提供了一种新的稳定的CRS-R Rasch校准,并且没有因患者病因而产生任何DIF。所采用的基于测量的方法进一步深入了解了CRS-R的几个评分类别的诊断意义,证实了先前的发现,并表明“自动运动反应”(项目:运动功能)和“物体识别”(项目:视觉功能)可能分别代表MCS+和eMCS的行为表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing the Different Sets of Item-Level Diagnostic Criteria of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R): A Measurement-Based Approach Driven by Rasch Analysis.

Objectives: (1) To replicate the assessment of the internal construct validity of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) within the Rasch Measurement Theory framework using a larger multicenter sample size and (2) to compare the different sets of item-level diagnostic criteria against the measurement ruler constructed from Rasch analysis to understand how those criteria relate to the overall level of persons' consciousness.

Design: Multicenter retrospective study.

Setting: Seven centers.

Participants: A total of 380 inpatients with a disorder of consciousness with one or more observations, for a total sample of 1460 observations.

Interventions: Not applicable.

Main outcome measure: CRS-R.

Results: We created 2 subsamples: a validation subsample of 1 randomized assessment per subject (N=380) and a confirmation subsample using the further available assessments per subject (N=347). The Rasch analyses, conducted on the validation subsample and replicated on the confirmation one, demonstrated adequate satisfaction of all the model's requirements, including monotonicity, unidimensionality, local independence, invariance (χ2df=40.224; P=.020), and absence of significant differential item functioning across all person factors explored, including etiology. The reliability (Person Separation Index>0.870) was sufficient for individual person measurement, with the distinction of five Distinct Levels of Performance Ability. The CRS-R rulers based on the Rasch calibration allowed the visual comparison of the various sets of disorder of consciousness diagnostic criteria available, suggesting the possibility of a further refinement of these criteria.

Conclusions: This study improved the results of a previous Rasch analysis published in 2013. It delivered a new stable Rasch calibration of the CRS-R within the largest multicenter sample size available to date and without any differential item functioning by patient's etiology. The adopted measurement-based approach provided further insights into the diagnostic meaning of several score categories of the CRS-R, confirming previous findings and suggesting that "automatic motor response" (item: motor function) and "object recognition" (item: visual function) are likely to represent behavioral manifestations of MCS+ and eMCS, respectively.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.70%
发文量
495
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation publishes original, peer-reviewed research and clinical reports on important trends and developments in physical medicine and rehabilitation and related fields. This international journal brings researchers and clinicians authoritative information on the therapeutic utilization of physical, behavioral and pharmaceutical agents in providing comprehensive care for individuals with chronic illness and disabilities. Archives began publication in 1920, publishes monthly, and is the official journal of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Its papers are cited more often than any other rehabilitation journal.
期刊最新文献
Individualized Physiotherapy and Activity Coaching in Multiple Sclerosis (IPAC-MS): Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. Comparative Cost Analysis of Neck Pain Treatments for Medicare Beneficiaries. Corrigendum. Prevalence of Chronic Health Conditions Among People with Disabilities in the United States. Exploring rest advice in fatigue interventions in rehabilitation among adults with long-term conditions: a systematic scoping review of the reporting of rest in randomised controlled trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1