TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of approaches for equating different versions of the mini-mental state examination administered in 22 studies
AU - Gross, Alden L.
AU - Kueider-Paisley, Alexandra M.
AU - Sullivan, Campbell
AU - Schretlen, David
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected].
PY - 2019/12/31
Y1 - 2019/12/31
N2 - The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is one of the most widely used cognitive screening tests in the world. However, its administration and content differs by country and region, precluding direct comparison of scores across different versions. Our objective was to compare 2 methods of deriving comparable scores across versions of the MMSE. Between 1981 and 2012, investigators in the International Neuropsychological Normative Database Initiative collected MMSE scores on 122,512 persons from 47 studies conducted in 35 countries. We used MMSE data from 80,559 adults aged 41-99 years from 22 studies that provided item-level response data. We first equated 14-point, 15-point, 18-point, 19-point, and 23-point versions of the MMSE to the original 30-point version using coarse equipercentile equating methods that preserved differences across continents, age groups, and durations (years) of education. We then derived more precise item response theory-based scores using item-level responses to MMSE component items. We compared the 2 score-equating approaches using correlation and Bland-Altman plots. Both test-equating approaches were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.73) and with raw MMSE point totals. Bland-Altman plots revealed minimal evidence of systematic differences between the approaches. Our findings support the use of equipercentile equating when item-level data are unavailable to facilitate development of international test norms.
AB - The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is one of the most widely used cognitive screening tests in the world. However, its administration and content differs by country and region, precluding direct comparison of scores across different versions. Our objective was to compare 2 methods of deriving comparable scores across versions of the MMSE. Between 1981 and 2012, investigators in the International Neuropsychological Normative Database Initiative collected MMSE scores on 122,512 persons from 47 studies conducted in 35 countries. We used MMSE data from 80,559 adults aged 41-99 years from 22 studies that provided item-level response data. We first equated 14-point, 15-point, 18-point, 19-point, and 23-point versions of the MMSE to the original 30-point version using coarse equipercentile equating methods that preserved differences across continents, age groups, and durations (years) of education. We then derived more precise item response theory-based scores using item-level responses to MMSE component items. We compared the 2 score-equating approaches using correlation and Bland-Altman plots. Both test-equating approaches were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.73) and with raw MMSE point totals. Bland-Altman plots revealed minimal evidence of systematic differences between the approaches. Our findings support the use of equipercentile equating when item-level data are unavailable to facilitate development of international test norms.
KW - aging
KW - co-calibration
KW - cognitive function
KW - elderly
KW - equipercentile equating
KW - harmonization
KW - item response theory
KW - psychological tests
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85080847944&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85080847944&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/aje/kwz228
DO - 10.1093/aje/kwz228
M3 - Article
C2 - 31598649
AN - SCOPUS:85080847944
SN - 0002-9262
VL - 188
SP - 2202
EP - 2212
JO - American journal of epidemiology
JF - American journal of epidemiology
IS - 12
ER -