Premium
Rasch analysis of The M elbourne Assessment of Unilateral Upper Limb Function
Author(s) -
Randall Melinda,
Imms Christine,
Carey Leeanne M,
Pallant Julie F
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
developmental medicine and child neurology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.658
H-Index - 143
eISSN - 1469-8749
pISSN - 0012-1622
DOI - 10.1111/dmcn.12391
Subject(s) - rasch model , raw score , differential item functioning , psychology , movement assessment , cerebral palsy , construct validity , item response theory , upper limb , internal consistency , psychometrics , physical therapy , physical medicine and rehabilitation , clinical psychology , developmental psychology , medicine , motor skill , statistics , psychiatry , raw data , mathematics
Aim This study investigated the internal construct validity and dimensionality of the M elbourne A ssessment of U nilateral U pper L imb F unction ( M elbourne A ssessment), a widely‐used measure of quality of upper limb movement, valid for children aged 2 years 6 months to 15 years with cerebral palsy. Method Rasch analysis was used to assess of M elbourne A ssessment raw scores for 163 children (94 males, 69 females; mean age 8y, SD 3y 5mo). Analysis was undertaken on the full scale comprising 37 scores and on groups of scores separated into four distinct movement subscales: range of movement, accuracy, dexterity, and fluency. Tests were conducted to evaluate overall model fit, item fit, suitability of the response options, unidimensionality, and differential item functioning ( DIF ) for sex, child age, and different raters. Results The results did not support the unidimensionality of the 37 ‐ score scale. The four subscales showed adequate model fit after removal of some score items, and rescaling of others. The resulting subscales showed good internal consistency and no DIF for sex or child age. Interpretation This study provides empirical support for a revised version of the M elbourne A ssessment which comprises 14 tasks and 30 movement scores grouped across four separate subscales. Further testing is required to assess the responsiveness of subscales to clinically important change.