Umeå University's logo

Objectives: Dupuytren disease is a common condition that causes progressive finger contractures resulting in impaired hand function and difficulties in performing daily activities. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used in research and clinical practice to evaluate treatment outcomes. Both general upper extremity PROMs and Dupuytren-specific PROMs are available, typically developed using conventional methodology based on classical test theory. However, most current PROMs have been shown to have low responsiveness and the relevance of included items have been questioned. In this study we aim to develop a new Dupuytren-specific PROM using modern measurement methodology based on item response theory (IRT).

Methods: The study will be performed in three phases. In Phase 1, (completed), an expert group developed a questionnaire with a large number of potentially relevant items derived from existing PROMs and patient collaboration. In Phase 2, the questionnaire will be administered to 300 patients with Dupuytren disease, and their responses will be analyzed with IRT methodology to identify the best performing items to be included in the new PROM. In Phase 3, the new PROM will be administered to 300 additional patients for validation.

Conclusion: This new Dupuytren-specific patient-reported outcome measure will help advance clinical research on Dupuytren disease.

The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Swedish version of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation–Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) using classical test theory and item response theory (IRT). The CORE-OM is a commonly used 34-item self-report instrument measuring psychological problems/distress covering four domains: subjective well-being, problems/symptoms, functioning and risk. Despite its broad application, only a few studies have used IRT to examine the psychometric properties, and the properties of the Swedish version have only been examined in one initial study. The present study included 1,011 clients with mild to moderate symptoms of distress, applying for psychotherapy at an outpatient training clinic in Sweden. Clients' responses were subjected to classical item analyses as well as IRT (Rasch) analysis using the partial credit model. The classical analyses demonstrated high levels of internal consistency and acceptable levels of item discrimination for the majority of the items, although lower for some items, particularly in the Risk domain. IRT analyses showed that there was a rather good match between item and respondent locations and the measurement precision was high. Disordered step and average measures for some of the items in the Risk domain indicate that these items were problematic from a psychometric point of view and only applicable for a minority of the participants. Differential item functioning for gender in some of the items suggests that they might need to be revised to minimise potential gender bias.

Purpose: To assess score agreement between the Atroshi-Lyrén 6-item symptoms scale and the Boston 11-item symptom severity scale and compare their responsiveness in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome before and after carpal tunnel release surgery.

Methods: This prospective cohort study included 3 cohorts that completed the A-L and Boston scales (conventional score 1–5) on the same occasion: a preoperative and short-term postoperative cohort (212 patients), a mid-term postoperative cohort (101 patients), and a long-term postoperative cohort (124 patients). Agreement was assessed with Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient and Passing-Bablok regression analysis. Analyses using item response theory were conducted on responses from the preoperative/short-term postoperative cohort including testing of item infit/outfit. Reliability was assessed with Cronbach alpha. Overall and sex-specific effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d.

Results: Lin’s CCCs were high (0.81–0.91). Passing-Bablok analysis showed constant and proportional differences in all cohorts except preoperative to short-term postoperative change. Both scales showed high reliability (alpha, 0.88–0.93). The IRT-based analyses showed infit/outfit values within the desired range. With IRT-based scoring, the A-L scale had significantly higher responsiveness than the Boston scale, overall (d, 2.02 vs 1.59), in women (d, 2.22 vs 1.77) and in men (d, 1.74 vs 1.36).

Conclusion: The Atroshi-Lyrén 6-item symptoms scale and the Boston 11-item symptom severity scale show good agreement but are not equivalent in measuring CTS-related symptoms severity. When using IRT-based scoring, the Atroshi-Lyrén scale demonstrated significantly higher responsiveness.

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between students’ college admissions test results and their performance in higher education using sum scores and optimal full-data scores. We used students from four university programs to examine predictive validity in terms of how the students performed on their studies in terms of obtained credits, as compared with their college admissions test results. The students’ test results were calculated using the commonly used sum scores and the recently proposed optimal scores. We also examined the predictive validity of the test scores while controlling for the student backgrounds in terms of educational background, migration background, and gender. The results show that using optimal scores or sum scores yields slightly different test score distributions, especially the score distribution among the highest test performers differed. Practical implications of which test scores to use in college admissions testing in the future are discussed.

The aim of this paper is to describe, analyze, and discuss how Swedish schools and the national tests in schools, university teaching and examination, and the college admissions test, Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test (SweSAT), have been affected by the COVID-19 situation. A further aim is to discuss the challenges in schools, universities and in the admissions test process in Sweden which are due to the COVID-19 situation. Contrary to many other countries, Swedish schools remained open, except for upper secondary school and universities where teaching went online. However, the spring administrations of the national tests and the high-stake college admission test, SweSAT, were cancelled, which had impact on admissions to universities in the fall. By using documentation from the news, school, and university authorities, as well as governmental reports of the events and a student survey, challenges are discussed. The novelty of this study includes a discussion of the events and their upcoming challenges. A discussion of what could be learned and what to expect in the close future is included, as well as conclusions which can be drawn from this situation.

This chapter gives an account of the admissions system to higher education in Sweden with special focus on the criteria used in the selection process: upper secondary school grades and scores from the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test (SweSAT). The Swedish educational system in general and the admissions system specifically have some unique features that may interest the reader. Primarily, the educational system, from preschool to higher education, has a comparatively high degree of centralization. Most higher education institutions are governed and funded by the state. This reflects on both the admissions process and the education that is provided by the universities. Other typical characteristics are strong beliefs in equal opportunities, lifelong learning, and second chances, all which influence the educational system in numerous ways. Higher education selection regulations are pervaded by meritocratic principles, but there are also expectations and demands for diversity in the student body.

The aim of this paper was to study fairness in testing by analyzing the quality of subscores for different groups of test takers. This is done by studying the value added ratio (VAR) for all subscores in the test, which here is a Swedish college admission test. Comparisons were made between test takers who take the regular test and test takers who are taking the test with extended time adaptation, as well as between males and females. Significant group differences in such subscore value would raise questions about fairness for that testing program. In particular, differences in subscore value between subgroups based on accommodations could indicate problems with the appropriateness of the accommodation. We found that the value added ratio (VAR) for all subscores in the studied test were slightly larger for males than for females. There were some differences between subgroups with respect to the extended time accommodation, but they were not systematic in the same way as for males and females. While the differences in the subscores' added value were small in general, they may in some instances be large enough to pose a threat to a valid and fair interpretation and use of test scores, and thus raises questions about fairness.

Since spring 1977 the Swedish Scholastic Assessment Test (SweSAT) has beenused as an instrument for selection to higher education. The aim of this reportis to describe the groups of test-takers in the spring and autumn 2018regarding composition and test scores. Results are presented for test-takersof different gender, age and background education. Further, a description isgiven of the norming and equating procedure and the outcome of thestandardization. Also, repeated test-taking is examined and discussed.

Högskoleprovet har sedan 1977 fungerat som urvalsinstrument för antagningtill universitets- och högskolestudier. Avsikten med föreligganderapport är att beskriva provtagargrupperna våren och hösten 2018 medavseende på sammansättning och resultat. Resultaten presenteras förprovtagare med olika kön, ålder och utbildning. Vidare beskrivs hurnormeringen av provresultaten genomförs och utfallet av normeringen, samtupprepat provtagande.

To be successful in a high-stakes testing situation is desirable for any test taker. It has been found that, beside content knowledge, test-taking behavior, such as risktaking strategies, motivation, and test anxiety, is important for test performance. The purposes of the present study were to identify and group test takers with similar patterns of test-taking behavior and to explore how these groups differ in terms of background characteristics and test performance in a high-stakes achievement test context. A sample of the Swedish Scholastic Assessment Test test takers (N = 1891) completed a questionnaire measuring their motivation, test anxiety, and risk-taking behavior during the test, as well as background characteristics. A two-step cluster analysis revealed three clusters of test takers with significantly different test-taking behavior profiles: a moderate (n = 741), a calm risk taker (n = 637), and a test anxious risk averse (n = 513) profile. Group difference analyses showed that the calm risk taker profile (i.e., a high degree of risktaking together with relatively low levels of test anxiety and motivation during the test) was the most successful profile from a test performance perspective, while the test anxious risk averse profile (i.e., a low degree of risk-taking together with high levels of test anxiety and motivation) was the least successful. Informing prospective test takers about these insights can potentially lead to more valid interpretations and inferences based on the test scores.

This study investigated whether different groups of test-takers vary in their reported test-taking behaviour in a high-stakes test situation. A between-group design (N = 1129) was used to examine whether high and low achievers, as well as females and males, differ in their use of test-taking strategies, and in level of reported test anxiety and motivation. The results showed differences between high and low achievers on a number of test-taking strategies, where high achievers reported using successful strategies to a higher extent. There were also gender differences: females, for example, reported using random guessing to a higher extent than males. Further, low achievers, especially females, reported significantly higher levels of test anxiety than high achievers, and high achievers reported slightly higher levels of motivation when compared to low achievers. To conclude, test-taking behaviour might bring additional variance to test scores, whether or not this is irrelevant variance is discussed.