↓ Skip to main content

The Guttman errors as a tool for response shift detection at subgroup and item levels

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
The Guttman errors as a tool for response shift detection at subgroup and item levels
Published in
Quality of Life Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11136-016-1268-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Myriam Blanchin, Véronique Sébille, Alice Guilleux, Jean-Benoit Hardouin

Abstract

Statistical methods for identifying response shift (RS) at the individual level could be of great practical value in interpreting change in PRO data. Guttman errors (GE) may help to identify discrepancies in respondent's answers to items compared to an expected response pattern and to identify subgroups of patients that are more likely to present response shift. This study explores the benefits of using a GE-based method for RS detection at the subgroup and item levels. The analysis was performed on the SatisQoL study. The number of GE was determined for each individual at each time of measurement (at baseline T0 and 6 months after discharge M6). Individuals showing discrepancies (with many GE) were suspected to interpret the items differently from the majority of the sample. Patients having a large number of GE at M6 only and not at T0 were assumed to present RS. Patients having a small number of GE at T0 and M6 were assumed to present no RS. The RespOnse Shift ALgorithm in Item response theory (ROSALI) was then applied on the whole sample and on both groups. Different types of RS (non-uniform recalibration, reprioritization) were more prevalent in the group composed of patients assumed to present RS based on GE. On the opposite, no RS was detected on patients having few GE. Guttman errors and item response theory models seem to be relevant tools to discriminate individuals affected by RS from the others at the item level.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 4 22%
Student > Master 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 22%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 4 22%
Unknown 4 22%