Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

How discriminating are discriminative instruments?

By M. Hankins

Abstract

The McMaster framework introduced by Kirshner &amp; Guyatt is the dominant paradigm for the development of measures of health status and health-related quality of life (HRQL). The framework defines the functions of such instruments as evaluative, predictive or discriminative. Evaluative instruments are required to be sensitive to change (responsiveness), but there is no corresponding index of the degree to which discriminative instruments are sensitive to cross-sectional differences.<br/><br/>This paper argues that indices of validity and reliability are not sufficient to demonstrate that a discriminative instrument performs its function of discriminating between individuals, and that the McMaster framework would be augmented by the addition of a separate index of discrimination. The coefficient proposed by Ferguson (Delta) is easily adapted to HRQL instruments and is a direct, non-parametric index of the degree to which an instrument distinguishes between individuals. While Delta should prove useful in the development and evaluation of discriminative instruments, further research is required to elucidate the relationship between the measurement properties of discrimination, reliability and responsivenes

Topics: RA0421
Year: 2008
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.soton.ac.uk:187361
Provided by: e-Prints Soton

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. Bossuyt PMM: On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of
  2. (2006). DL: The mathematical relationship among different forms of responsiveness coefficients. Qual Life Res doi
  3. (1985). Guyatt G: A methodological framework for assessing health indices. doi
  4. (1992). Measuring health status: what are the necessary measurement properties? doi
  5. (2000). The handbook of psychological testing. 2nd edition.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.