Extending the Floor and the Ceiling for Assessment of Physical Function

To improve the assessment of physical function by enhancing precision of physical function assessment as it pertains to subjects at extreme ends of the health continuum (i.e., subjects with extremely poor function [“floor”] or extremely good health [“ceiling”]).

[1]  D. Amtmann,et al.  Upper-extremity and mobility subdomains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) adult physical functioning item bank. , 2013, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[2]  J. Fries,et al.  Development and assessment of floor and ceiling items for the PROMIS physical function item bank , 2013, Arthritis Research & Therapy.

[3]  R. Hays,et al.  The future of measuring patient‐reported outcomes in rheumatology: Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) , 2011, Arthritis care & research.

[4]  J. Fries,et al.  Improved responsiveness and reduced sample size requirements of PROMIS physical function scales with item response theory , 2011, Arthritis research & therapy.

[5]  Wim J. van der Linden,et al.  Marginal likelihood inference for a model for item responses and response times. , 2010, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[6]  J. Fries,et al.  Better assessment of physical function: item improvement is neglected but essential , 2009, Arthritis research & therapy.

[7]  David Cella,et al.  Progress in Assessing Physical Function in Arthritis: PROMIS Short Forms and Computerized Adaptive Testing , 2009, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[8]  J. Fries,et al.  Improving patient reported outcomes using item response theory and computerized adaptive testing. , 2007, The Journal of rheumatology.

[9]  R. Hays,et al.  Item Response Theory Analyses of Physical Functioning Items in the Medical Outcomes Study , 2007, Medical care.

[10]  Cees A. W. Glas,et al.  Application of Multidimensional Item Response Theory Models to Longitudinal Data , 2006 .

[11]  J F Fries,et al.  The promise of PROMIS: using item response theory to improve assessment of patient-reported outcomes. , 2005, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[12]  S. J. Sinclair,et al.  Item Response Theory and Computerized Adaptive Testing: Implications for Outcomes Measurement in Rehabilitation , 2005 .

[13]  P. Tugwell,et al.  Percentile benchmarks in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Health Assessment Questionnaire as a quality indicator (QI) , 2004, Arthritis research & therapy.

[14]  P. Hannonen,et al.  Normative values for the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index: benchmarking disability in the general population. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[15]  A. Dowson,et al.  Applications of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) to the assessment of headache impact , 2003, Quality of Life Research.

[16]  D. Cella,et al.  Response to Hays et al and McHorney and Cohen: A Discussion of Item Response Theory and Its Applications in Health Status Assessment , 2000, Medical care.

[17]  RON D. HAYS,et al.  Item Response Theory and Health Outcomes Measurement in the 21st Century , 2000, Medical care.

[18]  J. Ware,et al.  The SF-36 Arthritis-Specific Health Index (ASHI): I. Development and cross-validation of scoring algorithms. , 1999, Medical care.

[19]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .

[20]  F. Wolfe,et al.  Impact of specific therapy upon rheumatoid arthritis. , 1986, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[21]  J. Fries,et al.  The dimensions of health outcomes: the health assessment questionnaire, disability and pain scales. , 1982, The Journal of rheumatology.

[22]  M Rose,et al.  Evaluation of a preliminary physical function item bank supported the expected advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[23]  J. Fries,et al.  The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress, and documentation. , 2003, The Journal of rheumatology.

[24]  Ware J.E.Jr.,et al.  THE MOS 36- ITEM SHORT FORM HEALTH SURVEY (SF- 36) CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND ITEM SELECTION , 1992 .

[25]  H. Holman,et al.  Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. , 1980, Arthritis and rheumatism.