↓ Skip to main content

Some recommendations for developing multidimensional computerized adaptive tests for patient-reported outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Some recommendations for developing multidimensional computerized adaptive tests for patient-reported outcomes
Published in
Quality of Life Research, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11136-018-1821-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niels Smits, Muirne C. S. Paap, Jan R. Böhnke

Abstract

Multidimensional item response theory and computerized adaptive testing (CAT) are increasingly used in mental health, quality of life (QoL), and patient-reported outcome measurement. Although multidimensional assessment techniques hold promises, they are more challenging in their application than unidimensional ones. The authors comment on minimal standards when developing multidimensional CATs. Prompted by pioneering papers published in QLR, the authors reflect on existing guidance and discussions from different psychometric communities, including guidelines developed for unidimensional CATs in the PROMIS project. The commentary focuses on two key topics: (1) the design, evaluation, and calibration of multidimensional item banks and (2) how to study the efficiency and precision of a multidimensional item bank. The authors suggest that the development of a carefully designed and calibrated item bank encompasses a construction phase and a psychometric phase. With respect to efficiency and precision, item banks should be large enough to provide adequate precision over the full range of the latent constructs. Therefore CAT performance should be studied as a function of the latent constructs and with reference to relevant benchmarks. Solutions are also suggested for simulation studies using real data, which often result in too optimistic evaluations of an item bank's efficiency and precision. Multidimensional CAT applications are promising but complex statistical assessment tools which necessitate detailed theoretical frameworks and methodological scrutiny when testing their appropriateness for practical applications. The authors advise researchers to evaluate item banks with a broad set of methods, describe their choices in detail, and substantiate their approach for validation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 16 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2021.
All research outputs
#5,716,154
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#546
of 2,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,641
of 330,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#24
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,916 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.