@article {169,
	title = {Computerized adaptive testing for follow-up after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation: II. Participation outcomes},
	journal = {Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation},
	volume = {89},
	number = {2},
	year = {2008},
	note = {Haley, Stephen MGandek, BarbaraSiebens, HilaryBlack-Schaffer, Randie MSinclair, Samuel JTao, WeiCoster, Wendy JNi, PengshengJette, Alan MK02 HD045354-01A1/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United StatesK02 HD45354-01/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United StatesR01 HD043568/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United StatesR01 HD043568-01/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United StatesResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralUnited StatesArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitationArch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008 Feb;89(2):275-83.},
	month = {Feb},
	pages = {275-283},
	edition = {2008/01/30},
	abstract = {OBJECTIVES: To measure participation outcomes with a computerized adaptive test (CAT) and compare CAT and traditional fixed-length surveys in terms of score agreement, respondent burden, discriminant validity, and responsiveness. DESIGN: Longitudinal, prospective cohort study of patients interviewed approximately 2 weeks after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation and 3 months later. SETTING: Follow-up interviews conducted in patient{\textquoteright}s home setting. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=94) with diagnoses of neurologic, orthopedic, or medically complex conditions. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participation domains of mobility, domestic life, and community, social, \& civic life, measured using a CAT version of the Participation Measure for Postacute Care (PM-PAC-CAT) and a 53-item fixed-length survey (PM-PAC-53). RESULTS: The PM-PAC-CAT showed substantial agreement with PM-PAC-53 scores (intraclass correlation coefficient, model 3,1, .71-.81). On average, the PM-PAC-CAT was completed in 42\% of the time and with only 48\% of the items as compared with the PM-PAC-53. Both formats discriminated across functional severity groups. The PM-PAC-CAT had modest reductions in sensitivity and responsiveness to patient-reported change over a 3-month interval as compared with the PM-PAC-53. CONCLUSIONS: Although continued evaluation is warranted, accurate estimates of participation status and responsiveness to change for group-level analyses can be obtained from CAT administrations, with a sizeable reduction in respondent burden.},
	keywords = {*Activities of Daily Living, *Adaptation, Physiological, *Computer Systems, *Questionnaires, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Chi-Square Distribution, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome Assessment (Health Care)/*methods, Patient Discharge, Prospective Studies, Rehabilitation/*standards, Subacute Care/*standards},
	isbn = {1532-821X (Electronic)0003-9993 (Linking)},
	author = {Haley, S. M. and Gandek, B. and Siebens, H. and Black-Schaffer, R. M. and Sinclair, S. J. and Tao, W. and Coster, W. J. and Ni, P. and Jette, A. M.}
}
@article {176,
	title = {Computerized adaptive testing for follow-up after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation: I. Activity outcomes},
	journal = {Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation},
	volume = {87},
	number = {8},
	year = {2006},
	note = {Haley, Stephen MSiebens, HilaryCoster, Wendy JTao, WeiBlack-Schaffer, Randie MGandek, BarbaraSinclair, Samuel JNi, PengshengK0245354-01/phsR01 hd043568/hd/nichdResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralUnited StatesArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitationArch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Aug;87(8):1033-42.},
	month = {Aug},
	pages = {1033-42},
	edition = {2006/08/01},
	abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To examine score agreement, precision, validity, efficiency, and responsiveness of a computerized adaptive testing (CAT) version of the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC-CAT) in a prospective, 3-month follow-up sample of inpatient rehabilitation patients recently discharged home. DESIGN: Longitudinal, prospective 1-group cohort study of patients followed approximately 2 weeks after hospital discharge and then 3 months after the initial home visit. SETTING: Follow-up visits conducted in patients{\textquoteright} home setting. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-four adults who were recently discharged from inpatient rehabilitation, with diagnoses of neurologic, orthopedic, and medically complex conditions. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Summary scores from AM-PAC-CAT, including 3 activity domains of movement and physical, personal care and instrumental, and applied cognition were compared with scores from a traditional fixed-length version of the AM-PAC with 66 items (AM-PAC-66). RESULTS: AM-PAC-CAT scores were in good agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient model 3,1 range, .77-.86) with scores from the AM-PAC-66. On average, the CAT programs required 43\% of the time and 33\% of the items compared with the AM-PAC-66. Both formats discriminated across functional severity groups. The standardized response mean (SRM) was greater for the movement and physical fixed form than the CAT; the effect size and SRM of the 2 other AM-PAC domains showed similar sensitivity between CAT and fixed formats. Using patients{\textquoteright} own report as an anchor-based measure of change, the CAT and fixed length formats were comparable in responsiveness to patient-reported change over a 3-month interval. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate estimates for functional activity group-level changes can be obtained from CAT administrations, with a considerable reduction in administration time.},
	keywords = {*Activities of Daily Living, *Adaptation, Physiological, *Computer Systems, *Questionnaires, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Chi-Square Distribution, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome Assessment (Health Care)/*methods, Patient Discharge, Prospective Studies, Rehabilitation/*standards, Subacute Care/*standards},
	isbn = {0003-9993 (Print)},
	author = {Haley, S. M. and Siebens, H. and Coster, W. J. and Tao, W. and Black-Schaffer, R. M. and Gandek, B. and Sinclair, S. J. and Ni, P.}
}
@article {30,
	title = {Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the Headache Impact Test (HIT)},
	journal = {Quality of Life Research},
	volume = {12},
	number = {8},
	year = {2003},
	note = {0962-9343Journal Article},
	pages = {913-933},
	abstract = {BACKGROUND: Measurement of headache impact is important in clinical trials, case detection, and the clinical monitoring of patients. Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) of headache impact has potential advantages over traditional fixed-length tests in terms of precision, relevance, real-time quality control and flexibility. OBJECTIVE: To develop an item pool that can be used for a computerized adaptive test of headache impact. METHODS: We analyzed responses to four well-known tests of headache impact from a population-based sample of recent headache sufferers (n = 1016). We used confirmatory factor analysis for categorical data and analyses based on item response theory (IRT). RESULTS: In factor analyses, we found very high correlations between the factors hypothesized by the original test constructers, both within and between the original questionnaires. These results suggest that a single score of headache impact is sufficient. We established a pool of 47 items which fitted the generalized partial credit IRT model. By simulating a computerized adaptive health test we showed that an adaptive test of only five items had a very high concordance with the score based on all items and that different worst-case item selection scenarios did not lead to bias. CONCLUSION: We have established a headache impact item pool that can be used in CAT of headache impact.},
	keywords = {*Cost of Illness, *Decision Support Techniques, *Sickness Impact Profile, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Comparative Study, Disability Evaluation, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Headache/*psychology, Health Surveys, Human, Longitudinal Studies, Middle Aged, Migraine/psychology, Models, Psychological, Psychometrics/*methods, Quality of Life/*psychology, Software, Support, Non-U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t},
	author = {Bjorner, J. B. and Kosinski, M. and Ware, J. E., Jr.}
}
