Queiroga Fabiana, Epstein Jonathan, Erpelding Marie-Line, Soudant Marc, King Lauren, Spitz Elisabeth, Maillefert Jean-Francis, Fautrel Bruno, Callahan Leigh F, March Lyn, Hunter David J, Guillemin Francis
INSPIIRE, Université de Lorraine, Inserm, Nancy, France.
INSPIIRE, Université de Lorraine, Inserm, Nancy, France; CIC Clinical epidemiology, CHRU Nancy, Inserm, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Oct;174:111467. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111467. Epub 2024 Jul 26.
This study aims to compare methods of constructing a composite score for the Flare-OA-16 self-reported questionnaire.
Participants with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) completed a validated 16-item questionnaire assessing five domains of flare. Three estimation methods were compared: (i) second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); (ii) logistic regression, according to the participant's self-report of flare (yes/no); and (iii) Rasch method, with weighted scores in each dimension. The distribution (floor effect [FF] and ceiling effect [CF]) were described and the known-group validity (by self-reported flare) tested by Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Similarity between the scores was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and their performance against self-report compared by areas under ROC curves (AUC). Intrascore test-retest reliability at 14 days was assessed by ICC.
In a sample of 381 participants, 247 reported having a flare. CFA showed fit indices (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.95; root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.08) and estimated composite mean score = 4.33(SD = 2.85) (FF = 14.9%, CF = 0%). For the logistic regression estimation, the mean composite score was 6.48 (SD = 3.13) (FF = 0%; CF = 0%). With Rasch model, the mean composite score was 4.35 (SD = 2.60) (FF = 14.9%; CF = 0%). Similarity analysis indicated a greater concordance between CFA and Rasch scores (ICC = 0.98) than between logistic regression score and the two others (ICC = 0.88 with Rasch score and 0.90 with CFA score). The AUC indicated similar performance of all methods: logistic model (AUC = 0.89 [0.85-0.92]), CFA, and Rasch model (AUC = 0.86 [0.82-0.90]). The difference between groups was significant (P < .05) for scores estimated by CFA (3.98), Rasch model (4.95), and logistic regression (4.30). The reproducibility was ICC = 0.84 (0.75-0.90) for Rasch and CFA scores and ICC = 0.78(0.66-86) for logistic model.
Three alternatives explored to build a composite score showed similar construct validity. Some metric superiority (better score distribution and reproducibility) of the Rasch model is promising for the detection of occurrence and assessment of severity of a flare in OA.
