Cargando…

Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?

BACKGROUND: Two important goals when using questionnaires are (a) measurement: the questionnaire is constructed to assign numerical values that accurately represent the test taker’s attribute, and (b) prediction: the questionnaire is constructed to give an accurate forecast of an external criterion....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smits, Niels, van der Ark, L. Andries, Conijn, Judith M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5997739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29098607
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1720-4
_version_ 1783331098664632320
author Smits, Niels
van der Ark, L. Andries
Conijn, Judith M.
author_facet Smits, Niels
van der Ark, L. Andries
Conijn, Judith M.
author_sort Smits, Niels
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Two important goals when using questionnaires are (a) measurement: the questionnaire is constructed to assign numerical values that accurately represent the test taker’s attribute, and (b) prediction: the questionnaire is constructed to give an accurate forecast of an external criterion. Construction methods aimed at measurement prescribe that items should be reliable. In practice, this leads to questionnaires with high inter-item correlations. By contrast, construction methods aimed at prediction typically prescribe that items have a high correlation with the criterion and low inter-item correlations. The latter approach has often been said to produce a paradox concerning the relation between reliability and validity [1–3], because it is often assumed that good measurement is a prerequisite of good prediction. OBJECTIVE: To answer four questions: (1) Why are measurement-based methods suboptimal for questionnaires that are used for prediction? (2) How should one construct a questionnaire that is used for prediction? (3) Do questionnaire-construction methods that optimize measurement and prediction lead to the selection of different items in the questionnaire? (4) Is it possible to construct a questionnaire that can be used for both measurement and prediction? ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE: An empirical data set consisting of scores of 242 respondents on questionnaire items measuring mental health is used to select items by means of two methods: a method that optimizes the predictive value of the scale (i.e., forecast a clinical diagnosis), and a method that optimizes the reliability of the scale. We show that for the two scales different sets of items are selected and that a scale constructed to meet the one goal does not show optimal performance with reference to the other goal. DISCUSSION: The answers are as follows: (1) Because measurement-based methods tend to maximize inter-item correlations by which predictive validity reduces. (2) Through selecting items that correlate highly with the criterion and lowly with the remaining items. (3) Yes, these methods may lead to different item selections. (4) For a single questionnaire: Yes, but it is problematic because reliability cannot be estimated accurately. For a test battery: Yes, but it is very costly. Implications for the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5997739
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59977392018-06-25 Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it? Smits, Niels van der Ark, L. Andries Conijn, Judith M. Qual Life Res Special Section: Test Construction (by invitation only) BACKGROUND: Two important goals when using questionnaires are (a) measurement: the questionnaire is constructed to assign numerical values that accurately represent the test taker’s attribute, and (b) prediction: the questionnaire is constructed to give an accurate forecast of an external criterion. Construction methods aimed at measurement prescribe that items should be reliable. In practice, this leads to questionnaires with high inter-item correlations. By contrast, construction methods aimed at prediction typically prescribe that items have a high correlation with the criterion and low inter-item correlations. The latter approach has often been said to produce a paradox concerning the relation between reliability and validity [1–3], because it is often assumed that good measurement is a prerequisite of good prediction. OBJECTIVE: To answer four questions: (1) Why are measurement-based methods suboptimal for questionnaires that are used for prediction? (2) How should one construct a questionnaire that is used for prediction? (3) Do questionnaire-construction methods that optimize measurement and prediction lead to the selection of different items in the questionnaire? (4) Is it possible to construct a questionnaire that can be used for both measurement and prediction? ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE: An empirical data set consisting of scores of 242 respondents on questionnaire items measuring mental health is used to select items by means of two methods: a method that optimizes the predictive value of the scale (i.e., forecast a clinical diagnosis), and a method that optimizes the reliability of the scale. We show that for the two scales different sets of items are selected and that a scale constructed to meet the one goal does not show optimal performance with reference to the other goal. DISCUSSION: The answers are as follows: (1) Because measurement-based methods tend to maximize inter-item correlations by which predictive validity reduces. (2) Through selecting items that correlate highly with the criterion and lowly with the remaining items. (3) Yes, these methods may lead to different item selections. (4) For a single questionnaire: Yes, but it is problematic because reliability cannot be estimated accurately. For a test battery: Yes, but it is very costly. Implications for the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires are discussed. Springer International Publishing 2017-11-02 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5997739/ /pubmed/29098607 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1720-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Special Section: Test Construction (by invitation only)
Smits, Niels
van der Ark, L. Andries
Conijn, Judith M.
Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
title Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
title_full Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
title_fullStr Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
title_full_unstemmed Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
title_short Measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
title_sort measurement versus prediction in the construction of patient-reported outcome questionnaires: can we have our cake and eat it?
topic Special Section: Test Construction (by invitation only)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5997739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29098607
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1720-4
work_keys_str_mv AT smitsniels measurementversuspredictionintheconstructionofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairescanwehaveourcakeandeatit
AT vanderarklandries measurementversuspredictionintheconstructionofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairescanwehaveourcakeandeatit
AT conijnjudithm measurementversuspredictionintheconstructionofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairescanwehaveourcakeandeatit