MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?
Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?
Journal Article

Does Differential Item Functioning Jeopardize the Comparability of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Between Patients and Proxies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury?

2023
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Background Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is clearly recognized as a patient-important outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Patient-reported outcomes are therefore often used and supposed to be directly reported by the patients without interpretation of their responses by a physician or anyone else. However, patients with TBI are often unable to self-report because of physical and/or cognitive impairments. Thus, proxy-reported measures, e.g., family members, are often used on the patient’s behalf. Yet, many studies have reported that proxy and patient ratings differ and are noncomparable. However, most studies usually do not account for other potential confounding factors that may be associated with HRQoL. In addition, patients and proxies can interpret some items of the patient-reported outcomes differently. As a result, item responses may not only reflect patients’ HRQoL but also the respondent’s (patient or proxy) own perception of the items. This phenomenon, called differential item functioning (DIF), can lead to substantial differences between patient-reported and proxy-reported measures and compromise their comparability, leading to highly biased HRQoL estimates. Using data from the prospective multicenter continuous hyperosmolar therapy in traumatic brain-injured patients study (240 patients with HRQoL measured with the Short Form-36 (SF-36)), we assessed the comparability of patients’ and proxies’ reports by evaluating the extent to which items perception differs (i.e., DIF) between patients and proxies after controlling for potential confounders. Methods Items at risk of DIF adjusting for confounders were examined on the items of the role physical and role emotional domains of the SF-36. Results Differential item functioning was evidenced in three out of the four items of the role physical domain measuring role limitations due to physical health problems and in one out of the three items of the role emotional domain measuring role limitations due to personal or emotional problems. Overall, despite an expected similar level of role limitations between patients who were able to respond and those for whom proxies responded, proxies tend to give more pessimistic responses than patients in the case of major role limitations and more optimistic responses than patients in the case of minor limitations. Conclusions Patients with moderate-to-severe TBI and proxies seem to have different perceptions of the items measuring role limitations due to physical or emotional problems, questioning the comparability of patient and proxy data. Therefore, aggregating proxy and patient responses may bias HRQoL estimates and alter medical decision-making based on these patient-important outcomes.