The Comparability of English, French and Dutch Scores on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F): An Assessment of Differential Item Functioning in Patients with Systemic Sclerosis
Linda Kwakkenbos,
Linda M Willems,
Murray Baron,
Marie Hudson,
David Cella,
Cornelia H M van den Ende,
Brett D Thombs and
and the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group
PLOS ONE, 2014, vol. 9, issue 3, 1-7
Abstract:
Objective: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy- Fatigue (FACIT-F) is commonly used to assess fatigue in rheumatic diseases, and has shown to discriminate better across levels of the fatigue spectrum than other commonly used measures. The aim of this study was to assess the cross-language measurement equivalence of the English, French, and Dutch versions of the FACIT-F in systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients. Methods: The FACIT-F was completed by 871 English-speaking Canadian, 238 French-speaking Canadian and 230 Dutch SSc patients. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the factor structure in the three samples. The Multiple-Indicator Multiple-Cause (MIMIC) model was utilized to assess differential item functioning (DIF), comparing English versus French and versus Dutch patient responses separately. Results: A unidimensional factor model showed good fit in all samples. Comparing French versus English patients, statistically significant, but small-magnitude DIF was found for 3 of 13 items. French patients had 0.04 of a standard deviation (SD) lower latent fatigue scores than English patients and there was an increase of only 0.03 SD after accounting for DIF. For the Dutch versus English comparison, 4 items showed small, but statistically significant, DIF. Dutch patients had 0.20 SD lower latent fatigue scores than English patients. After correcting for DIF, there was a reduction of 0.16 SD in this difference. Conclusions: There was statistically significant DIF in several items, but the overall effect on fatigue scores was minimal. English, French and Dutch versions of the FACIT-F can be reasonably treated as having equivalent scoring metrics.
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0091979 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 91979&type=printable (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0091979
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091979
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().