Hobart JC: Rating scales for neurologists. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 2003, 74: iv22-iv26. 10.1136/jnnp.74.suppl_4.iv22
Article
PubMed Central
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hobart JC, Cano SJ, Zajicek JP, Thompson AJ: Rating scales as outcome measures for clinical trials in neurology: problems, solutions, and recommendations. Lancet Neurology 2007, 6: 1094–1105. 10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70290-9
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Administration FD: Patient reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labelling claims.[http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/prolbl.pdf]
Revicki DA: FDA draft guidance and health-outcomes research. Lancet 2007, 369: 540–542. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60250-5
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Agency EM: Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of the health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products. London, ; 2006.
Google Scholar
Cano SJ, Warner TT, Linacre JM, Bhatia KP, Thompson AJ, Fitzpatrick R, Hobart JC: Capturing the true burden of dystonia on patients: the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP-58). Neurology 2004, 63: 1629–1633.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Dillman DA: Mail and telephone surveys: the total design method. New York, Wiley; 1978.
Google Scholar
McHorney CA, Ware JEJ, Lu JFR, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care 1994, 32: 40–66. 10.1097/00005650-199401000-00004
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Cano SJ, Thompson AJ, Fitzpatrick R, Bhatia K, Thompson AJ, Warner TT, Hobart JC: Evidence-based guidelines for using the Short Form 36 in cervical dystonia. Movement Disorders 2006, 22: 122–127. 10.1002/mds.21187
Article
Google Scholar
Likert RA: A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology 1932, 140: 5–55.
Google Scholar
Stewart AL, Ware JEJ: Measuring functioning and well-being: the Medical Outcomes Study approach. Durham, North Carolina, Duke University Press; 1992.
Google Scholar
Group TWHOQOL: The World Health Organisation Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL): development and general psychometric properties. Social Science and Medicine 1998, 46: 1569–1585. 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00009-4
Article
Google Scholar
Ware JEJ, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B: SF-36 Health Survey manual and interpretation guide. Boston, Massachusetts, Nimrod Press; 1993.
Google Scholar
Hays RD, Hayashi T: Beyond internal consistency reliability: rationale and user's guide for Multi-Trait Analysis Program on the microcomputer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 1990, 22: 167–175.
Article
Google Scholar
DeVellis RF: Scale development: theory and applications. In Applied social research methods. Volume 26. London, Sage publications; 1991:121.
Google Scholar
Guttman LA: Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis. Psychometrika 1954, 19: 149–161. 10.1007/BF02289162
Article
Google Scholar
Ware JEJ, Harris WJ, Gandek B, Rogers BW, Reese PR: MAP-R for windows: multitrait /multi-item analysis program - revised user's guide. Boston, MA, Health Assessment Lab.; 1997.
Google Scholar
McHorney CA, Tarlov AR: Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Quality of Life Research 1995, 4: 293–307. 10.1007/BF01593882
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hays RD, Anderson R, Revicki DA: Psychometric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures. Quality of Life Research 1993, 2: 441–449. 10.1007/BF00422218
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Cronbach LJ: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951, 16: 297–334. 10.1007/BF02310555
Article
Google Scholar
McGraw KO, Wong SP: Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods 1996, 1: 30–46. 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30
Article
Google Scholar
Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH: Psychometric theory. 3rd edition. New York, McGraw-Hill; 1994.
Google Scholar
Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Barry CC: Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Services Research 1976, 11: 478–507.
PubMed Central
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Bohrnstedt GW: Measurement. In Handbook of survey research. Edited by: Rossi PH, Wright JD and Anderson AB. New York, Academic Press; 1983:69–121.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Ware JEJ, Sherbourne DC: The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care 1992, 30: 473–483. 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Goldberg DP, Hillier VF: A scaled version of the General Health Questionnaire. Psychological Medicine 1979, 9: 139–145.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Zigmond AS, Snaith RP: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 1983, 67: 361–370. 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Cano SJ, Hobart JC, Edwards M, Linacre JM, Fitzpatrick R, Bhatia K, Thompson AJ, Warner TT: CDIP-58 can measure the impact of botulinum toxin treatment in cervical dystonia. Neurology 2006, 67: 2230–2232. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000249310.25427.f2
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Rasch G: Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Volume (Reprinted 1980 by University of Chicago Press, Chicago). Copenhagen Chicago, Danish Institute for Education Research; 1960.
Google Scholar
Wright BD, Masters G: Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Chicago, MESA; 1982.
Google Scholar
Andrich D: Rasch models for measurement. In Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences, 07–068. Edited by: Lewis-Beck MS. Beverley Hills, CA, Sage Publications; 1988.
Google Scholar
Wright BD: Solving measurement problems with the Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement 1977, 14: 97–116. 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1977.tb00031.x
Article
Google Scholar
Massof RW: The measurement of vision disability. Optometry and Vision Science 2002, 79: 516–552. 10.1097/00006324-200208000-00015
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Andrich D: Controversy and the Rasch model: a characteristic of incompatible paradigms ? Medical Care 2004, 42: I7 - I16. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000103528.48582.7c
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Norquist JM, Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J, Jenkinson C: Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Med Care 2004, 42: I25–36. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000103530.13056.88
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
McHorney CA, Haley SM, Ware JEJ: Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale (PF-10): II. comparison of relative precision using Likert and Rasch scoring methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1997, 50: 451–461. 10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00424-6
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Prieto L, Alonso J, Lamarca R: Classical test theory versus Rasch analysis for quality of life questionnaire reduction. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003, 1: 27. 10.1186/1477-7525-1-27
Article
PubMed Central
PubMed
Google Scholar