journal article Apr 01, 2025

Improving Measurement Efficiency of the Voice Handicap Index‐10 With Item Response Theory

The Laryngoscope Vol. 135 No. 8 pp. 2854-2862 · Wiley
View at Publisher Save 10.1002/lary.32161
Abstract
ABSTRACTObjectivesTo assess: (1) the Voice Handicap‐10 (VHI) instrument with item response theory (IRT) and determine which items convey the most information, (2) the extent to which voice handicap can be measured with a subset of items for efficient information intake, and (3) whether a proposed shorter scale has differing discriminatory ability for key diagnoses made by fellowship‐trained laryngologists, as compared to the 10‐item instrument.MethodsProspectively collected data from 3640 patients who completed the VHI‐10 questionnaire during evaluation at a tertiary care otolaryngology clinic were utilized. IRT analysis provided discrimination and location parameters associated with each item. Residual item correlations were also assessed to assess redundant information. Based on these results, two 5‐item subsets were further evaluated using item information function curves. Areas under receiver‐operator characteristic curves (ROC‐AUC) were also calculated to evaluate the discriminatory ability for findings from videolaryngoscopy/stroboscopy.ResultsItem discrimination parameter estimates ranged from 1.55 to 4.68, with higher values indicating more information. Residual item correlations were determined within item pairs, and location parameters were calculated. Based on these data, potential 5‐item subsets were proposed, which preserved the capacity to reflect underlying voice handicap assessment. ROC‐AUC analyses suggested no significant difference between the 5‐item subset and 10‐item instrument with regard to their ability to discriminate whether findings such as vocal fold paralysis were present.ConclusionsIRT data distinguished items for a proposed 5‐item subset of the 10‐item instrument, with the goal of reflecting the latent trait without significant loss of discrimination and precision.Level of EvidenceLevel 2—Prospective validation study with reference standard.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
51
[5]
Voice-Related Symptoms and Their Effects on Quality of Life

Ray M. Merrill, Nelson Roy, Jessica Lowe

Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology 10.1177/000348941312200610
[11]
Seifpanahi S. "Translated Versions of Voice Handicap Index (VHI)‐30 Across Languages: A Systematic Review" Iranian Journal of Public Health (2015)
[12]
The Voice Handicap Index (VHI)

Barbara H. Jacobson, Alex Johnson, Cynthia Grywalski et al.

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 10.1044/1058-0360.0603.66
[16]
Lord F. M. (1980)
[17]
Yen W. M. F. A. (2006)
[28]
[34]
ICD‐10 “CMS ”2015 accessed April 16 2022 https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/ICD10.
[35]
International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision (ICD‐9) 2022 accessed April 16 2022 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd9.htm.
[36]
Verdolini K. (2005)
[39]
The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education

Keith S. Taber

Research in Science Education 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
[40]
Cai L. (2021)
[44]
Comparing the Areas under Two or More Correlated Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves: A Nonparametric Approach

Elizabeth R. DeLong, David M. DeLong, Daniel L. Clarke-Pearson

Biometrics 10.2307/2531595
[49]
Gershon R. C. "Computer Adaptive Testing" Journal of Applied Measurement (2005)

Showing 50 of 51 references