• 1
    ERIQA Group. Comments on the Reflection paper on the regulatory. Guidance for the Use of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) Measures in the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Available from:[Accessed March 15, 2007]
  • 2
    Morris LA, Miller DW. The regulation of patient-reported outcome claims: need for a flexible standard. Value Health 2002;5:37281.
  • 3
    Du Bois D. Meeting Report, Session 2: How to integrate patient-reported outcomes in international trials? Regulatory issues. AcquadroC, ed. Patient Related Outcomes Newsletter. Lyon: MAPI Research Trust, 2005;3:610.
  • 4
    Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193205.
  • 5
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [Draft]. Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Available from:[Accessed March 15, 2007].
  • 6
    Nunnally J. Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.
  • 7
    Fries JF, Bjorner JB, Lingala B, Sun X. Improving measurement precision can reduce sample size requirement for clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65(Suppl. 3):III16-21.
  • 8
    Zimmerman DW, Williams RH. Note on the reliability of experimental measures and the power of significance tests. Psych Bull 1986;100:1234.
  • 9
    Jackson DN. A sequential system for personality scale development. In: SpielbergerCD, ed., Current Topics in Clinical and Community Psychology. New York: Academic Press, 1970.
  • 10
    Hays RD, Fayers P. Evaluating multi-item scales. In: FayersP, HaysR, eds. Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, 4153.
  • 11
    McDowell I. Measuring Health (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
  • 12
    Hays RD, Hadorn D. Responsiveness to change. an aspect of validity, not a separate dimension. Qual Life Res 1992;1:735.
  • 13
    Thissen D, Wainer H. Some standard errors in item response theory. Psychometrika 1982;47:397412.
  • 14
    Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics (3rd edn). New York: Harper Collins, 1996.
  • 15
    Charter RA. Sample size requirements for precise estimates of reliability, generalizability, and validity coefficients. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 1999;21:55966.
  • 16
    Reeve BB, Fayers P. Applying item response theory modeling for evaluating questionnaire items and scale properties. In: FayersP, HaysR, eds., Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
  • 17
    Wright BD, Stone MH. Best Test Design. Chicago, IL: MESA Press, 1979.
  • 18
    Reeve BB. Special issues for building computerized-adaptive tests for measuring patient-reported outcomes. The National Institute of Health's investment in new technology. Med Care 2006;44(11 Suppl. 3):S198204.
  • 19
    Turner RR, Quittner AL, Parasuraman BM, et al. Patient-reported outcomes: instrument development and selection issues. Value Health 2007;10(Suppl. 2):S8693.
  • 20
    Rothman ML, Beltran P, Cappelleri JC, et al. Patient-reported outcomes: conceptual issues. Value Health 2007;10(Suppl. 2):S6675.
  • 21
    Ware JE Jr, Bjorner JB, Kosinski M. Practical implications of item response theory and computerized adaptive testing: a brief summary of ongoing studies of widely used headache impact scales. Medical Care 2000;38:II7382.
  • 22
    Bjorner JB, Kosinski M, Ware JE Jr. Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the headache impact test (HIT). Qual Life Res 2003;12:91333.
  • 23
    Lai JS, Cella D, Chang CH, et al. Item banking to improve, shorten and computerize self-reported fatigue: an illustration of steps to create a core item bank from the FACIT-Fatigue Scale. Qual Life Res 2003;12:485501.
  • 24
    Acquadro C, Conway K, Giroudet C, Mear I. Linguistic Validation Manual for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments. Lyon: MAPI Research Institute, 2004.
  • 25
    Gendreau M, Hufford MR, Stone AA. Measuring clinical pain in chronic widespread pain: selected methodological issues. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2003;17:57592.
  • 26
    Hepner KA, Brown JA, Hays RD. Comparison of mail and telephone in assessing patient experiences in receiving care from medical group practices. Eval Health Prof 2005;28:37789.
  • 27
    Magaziner J, Zimmerman SI, Gruber-Baldini AL, et al. Proxy reporting in five areas of functional status: comparison with self-reports and observations of performance. Am J Epidem 1997;146:41828.
  • 28
    Frost MH, Bonomi AE, Ferrans CE, et al. Patient, clinician, and population perspectives on determining the clinical significance of health-related quality of life scores. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:48894.
  • 29
    Sloan JA, Dueck A, Erickson PA, et al. Analysis and interpretation of results based on patient-reported outcomes. Value Health 2007;10(Suppl. 2):S10615.
  • 30
    Snyder CF, Watson ME, Jackson JD, et al. Patient-reported outcome instrument selection: designing a measurement strategy. Value Health 2007;10(Suppl. 2):S7685.
  • 31
    Sloan JA, Aaronson N, Cappelleri JC, et al. Assessing the clinical significance of single items relative to summated scores. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:48894.
  • 32
    Harkness J, Pennell B-E, Schoua-Glusberg A. Survey questionnaire translation and assessment. In: PresserS, RothgebJM, CouperMP, et al., eds. Methods for Testing Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2004.
  • 33
    Aday LA. Designing and Conducting Health Surveys (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996.
  • 34
    Zukerberg AL, Von Thurn DR, Moore JC. Practical considerations in sample size selection for behavior coding pretests. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods. Amer Stat Assoc, 1995.
  • 35
    Willis G. Beyond cognitive testing. In: WillisGB, ed., Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005.
  • 36
    Harris-Kojetin LD, Fowler FJ, Brown JA, et al. The use of cognitive testing to develop and evaluate CAHPS™ 1.0 core survey items. Med Care 1999;37(Suppl.):MS1021.
  • 37
    Morales LS. Assessing patient experiences with assessing healthcare in multi-cultural settings. RAND, Santa Monica, CA. Dissertation (chapter 2) 2000. Available from:[Accessed March 15, 2007].
  • 38
    Thissen D, Steinberg L, Wainer H. Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In: HollandPW, WainerH, eds. Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1993.
  • 39
    Raju NS, Van Der Linden WJ, Fleer PF. IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests. Appl Psychol Measurement 1995;19:35368.
  • 40
    Fleishman JA, Lawrence WF. Demographic variation in SF-12 scores: true differences or differential item functioning. Medical Care 2003;41:III7586.
  • 41
    Zumbo BD. A Handbook on the Theory and Methods of Differential Item Functioning (DIF): Logistic Regression Modeling as a Unitary Framework for Binary and Likert-type (Ordinal) Item Scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation. Department of National Defense, 1999.
  • 42
    Reuben DB, Seeman TE, Keeler E, et al. The effect of self-reported and performance-based functional impairment on future hospital costs of community-dwelling older persons. Gerontologist 2004;44:4017.
  • 43
    Reuben DB, Seeman TE, Keeler E, et al. Refining the categorization of physical functional status: the added value of combining self-reported and performance-based measures. J Gerontology: Med Sci 2004;59A:105661.
  • 44
    Johns MW. Sensitivity and specificity of the multiple sleep latency test (MLST), the maintenance of wakefulness test and the Epworth sleepiness scale; Failure of the MSLT as a gold standard. J Sleep Res 2000;9:511.