Table 9. PROMIS anxiety short form item set: Differential item function (DIF) results. Gender and age subgroup comparisons.
Item description | IRTPRO | Lordif | Magnitude (NCDIF) | Effect Size T1 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Age | Gender | Age | Gender | Age | Gender | Age | |||||
21-49 vs. 50-64 | 21-49 vs. 65-84 | 21-49 vs. 50-64 | 21-49 vs. 65-84 | 21-49 vs. 50-64 | 21-49 vs. 65-84 | 21-49 vs. 50-64 | 21-49 vs. 65-84 | |||||
I felt fearful | NU | U* | NU*; U* | NU; U* | U* | NU*; U* | 0.0087 | 0.0112 | 0.0213 | 0.0770 | 0.0929 | 0.1219† |
I felt anxious | U* | U* | U* | U* | U* | 0.0040 | 0.0079 | 0.0069 | 0.0448 | 0.0733 | 0.0669 | |
I felt worried | U* | U* | U* | U* | U* | 0.0030 | 0.0081 | 0.0178 | 0.0473 | 0.0819 | 0.1175† | |
I found it hard to focus on anything other than my anxiety | NU | U* | U | U* | 0.0068 | 0.0052 | 0.0072 | -0.0564 | -0.0547 | -0.0604 | ||
I felt nervous | NU*; U* | NU; U* | 0.0001 | 0.0010 | 0.0044 | 0.0007 | -0.0179 | -0.0484 | ||||
I felt uneasy | U | NU; U | U* | U* | 0.0049 | 0.0052 | 0.0092 | -0.0464 | -0.0423 | -0.0629 | ||
I felt tense | NU*; U* | NU*; U* | NU; U* | U | U* | 0.0016 | 0.0017 | 0.0024 | 0.0213 | 0.0260 | 0.0244 | |
My worries overwhelmed me | U | U* | U* | 0.0011 | 0.0007 | 0.0008 | 0.0187 | 0.0210 | 0.0204 | |||
I felt like I needed help for my anxiety | U* | U | U* | 0.0017 | 0.0062 | 0.0038 | -0.0282 | -0.0577 | -0.0404 | |||
Many situations made me worry | NU | NU | U* | U* | 0.0006 | 0.0014 | 0.0020 | 0.0108 | -0.0223 | -0.0288 | ||
I had difficulty calming down | U* | U* | U | NU | U* | U* | 0.0126 | 0.0122 | 0.0182 | -0.0810 | -0.0809 | -0.0991 |
All non-compensatory differential item functioning (NCDIF) values were smaller than the threshold (0.0960)
Indicates value above threshold of 0.10; bolded values are above 0.15.
Asterisks indicate significance after adjustment for multiple comparisons.
NU= Non-uniform DIF involving the discrimination parameters; U=Uniform DIF involving the location parameters.
For the lordif analyses, the Uniform and non-uniform DIF was determined using the likelihood ratio chi-square test. Uniform DIF is obtained by comparing the log likelihood values from models one and two. Non-uniform DIF is obtained by comparing the log likelihood values from models two and three. DIF was not detected using the pseudo R2 measures or the change in Beta criterion.