You are here
Item response theory facilitated cocalibrating cognitive tests and reduced bias in estimated rates of decline.
Tuesday,2012-11-06 12:09 America/Los_Angeles — eenright
| Title | Item response theory facilitated cocalibrating cognitive tests and reduced bias in estimated rates of decline. |
| Publication Type | Journal Article |
| Year of Publication | 2008 |
| Authors | Crane, PK, Narasimhalu, K, Gibbons, LE, Mungas, DM, Haneuse, S, Larson, EB, Kuller, L, Hall, K, van Belle, G |
| Journal | J Clin Epidemiol |
| Volume | 61 |
| Issue | 10 |
| Pagination | 1018-27.e9 |
| Date Published | 2008 Oct |
| ISSN | 1878-5921 |
| Keywords | Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Dementia, Disease Progression, Epidemiologic Methods, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychometrics |
| Abstract | <p><b>OBJECTIVE: </b>To cocalibrate the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Modified Mini-Mental State, the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument, and the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia using item response theory (IRT) to compare screening cut points used to identify cases of dementia from different studies, to compare measurement properties of the tests, and to explore the implications of these measurement properties on longitudinal studies of cognitive functioning over time.</p><p><b>STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: </b>We used cross-sectional data from three large (n>1000) community-based studies of cognitive functioning in the elderly. We used IRT to cocalibrate the scales and performed simulations of longitudinal studies.</p><p><b>RESULTS: </b>Screening cut points varied quite widely across studies. The four tests have curvilinear scaling and varied levels of measurement precision, with more measurement error at higher levels of cognitive functioning. In longitudinal simulations, IRT scores always performed better than standard scoring, whereas a strategy to account for varying measurement precision had mixed results.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION: </b>Cocalibration allows direct comparison of cognitive functioning in studies using any of these four tests. Standard scoring appears to be a poor choice for analysis of longitudinal cognitive testing data. More research is needed into the implications of varying levels of measurement precision.</p> |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.011 |
| Alternate Journal | J Clin Epidemiol |
| PubMed ID | 18455909 |
| PubMed Central ID | PMC2762121 |
| Grant List | R01 AG010220 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States P50 AG005136-25 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States AG15928 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States K08 AG 022232 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States P50 AG05136 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85085 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States R01 AG015928 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States R01 AG010220-16 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States R01 AG009956 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States U01 HL080295 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85081 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States N01 HC015103 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States R56 AG020098 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States K08 AG022232-01 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01HC55222 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States P50 AG005136 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85086 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States N01HC85086 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States R01 AG 09956 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85082 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States U01 HL077863-05 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States P50 AG005136-149006 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01 HC-55222 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States U01 AG006781-13 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States AG 20098 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States U01-AG-06781 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85083 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85080 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States U01 AG006781 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States R01 AG009956-12 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States R01 AG020098 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States P30 AG010129-129001 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85079 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States P30 AG010129 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01HC85079 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States N01 HC085079 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States N01 HC035129 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States K08 AG022232 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States N01-HC-85084 / HC / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States |