Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:30:13.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Japanese–English language equivalence of the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument among Japanese-Americans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

Laura E. Gibbons ,
Susan McCurry ,
Kristoffer Rhoads ,
Kamal Masaki ,
Lon White ,
Amy R. Borenstein ,
Eric B. Larson  and
Paul K. Crane
Laura E. Gibbons*
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, U.S.A.
Susan McCurry
Affiliation:
Department of Psychosocial and Community Health, University of Washington, Seattle, U.S.A.
Kristoffer Rhoads
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, U.S.A.
Kamal Masaki
Affiliation:
Kuakini Medical Center and the Pacific Health Research Institute, Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A.
Lon White
Affiliation:
Kuakini Medical Center and the Pacific Health Research Institute, Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A.
Amy R. Borenstein
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, U.S.A.
Eric B. Larson
Affiliation:
Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative and Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, U.S.A.
Paul K. Crane
Affiliation:
Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative and Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, U.S.A.
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Dr. Laura E. Gibbons, Box 359780, Harborview Medical Center, 325 Ninth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104, U.S.A. Phone: +1 (206) 744 1842; Fax: +1 (206) 744 9917. Email: gibbonsl@u.washington.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: The Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI) was designed for use in cross-cultural studies of Japanese and Japanese-American elderly in Japan and the U.S.A. The measurement equivalence in Japanese and English had not been confirmed in prior studies.

Methods: We analyzed the 40 CASI items for differential item functioning (DIF) related to test language, as well as self-reported proficiency with written Japanese, age, and educational attainment in two large epidemiologic studies of Japanese-American elderly: the Kame Project (n=1708) and the Honolulu-Asia Aging Study (HAAS; n = 3148). DIF was present if the demographic groups differed in the probability of success on an item, after controlling for their underlying cognitive functioning ability.

Results: While seven CASI items had DIF related to language of testing in Kame (registration of one item; recall of one item; similes; judgment; repeating a phrase; reading and performing a command; and following a three-step instruction), the impact of DIF on participants' scores was minimal. Mean scores for Japanese and English speakers in Kame changed by <0.1 SD after accounting for DIF related to test language. In HAAS, insufficient numbers of participants were tested in Japanese to assess DIF related to test language. In both studies, DIF related to written Japanese proficiency, age, and educational attainment had minimal impact.

Conclusions: To the extent that DIF could be assessed, the CASI appeared to meet the goal of measuring cognitive function equivalently in Japanese and English. Stratified data collection would be needed to confirm this conclusion. DIF assessment should be used in other studies with multiple language groups to confirm that measures function equivalently or, if not, form scores that account for DIF.

Keywords

cognitive testingcross-culturaldementiadifferential item functioningitem response theorytest bias
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 129 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
Camilli, G. and Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for Identifying Biased Test Items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Crane, P. K. (2006). Commentary on comparing translations of the EORTC QLQ-C30 using differential item functioning analyses. Quality of Life Research, 15, 1117–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crane, P. K., van Belle, G. and Larson, E. B. (2004). Test bias in a cognitive test: differential item functioning in the CASI. Statistics in Medicine, 23, 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crane, P. K., Gibbons, L. E., Jolley, L. and van Belle, G. (2006). Differential item functioning analysis with ordinal logistic regression techniques: DIFdetect and difwithpar. Medical Care, 44, S115–S123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crane, P. K. et al. (2007). A comparison of three sets of criteria for determining the presence of differential item functioning using ordinal logistic regression. Quality of Life Research, 16 (Suppl. 1), 69–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dorans, N. J. and Kulick, E. (2006). Differential item functioning on the Mini-mental State Examination: an application of the Mantel-Haenszel and standardization procedures. Medical Care, 44, S107–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edelen, M. O., Thissen, D., Teresi, J. A., Kleinman, M. and Ocepek-Welikson, K. (2006). Identification of differential item functioning using item response theory and the likelihood-based model comparison approach: application to the Mini-mental State Examination. Medical Care, 44, S134–S142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E. and McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves, A. B. et al. (1996). Prevalence of dementia and its subtypes in the Japanese American population of King County, Washington state. The Kame Project. American Journal of Epidemiology, 144, 760–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyatt, G. H., Osoba, D., Wu, A. W., Wyrwich, K. W. and Norman, G. R. (2002). Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 77, 371–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasegawa, K. (1983). The clinical assessment of dementia in the aged: a dementia screening scale for psychogeriatric patients. In Bergener, M., Lehr, U., Lang, E. and Schmitz-Scherzer, R. (eds.), Aging in the Eighties and Beyond (pp. 207–218). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Jones, R. N. (2006). Identification of measurement differences between English and Spanish language versions of the Mini-mental State Examination: detecting differential item functioning using MIMIC modeling. Medical Care, 44, S124–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, R. N. and Gallo, J. J. (2001). Education bias in the Mini-mental State Examination. International Psychogeriatrics, 13, 299–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, R. N. and Gallo, J. J. (2002). Education and sex differences in the Mini-mental State Examination: effects of differential item functioning. Journals of Gerontology. Series B. Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 57B, P548–P558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, J. S., Teresi, J. and Gershon, R. (2005). Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Evaluation in the Health Professions, 28, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larson, E. B. et al. (1998). Standardization of the clinical diagnosis of the dementia syndrome and its subtypes in a cross-national study: the Ni-Hon-Sea experience. Journals of Gerontology. Series A. Medical Sciences, 53A, M313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, S. C., Mungas, D., Weldon, M., Reed, B. and Haan, M. (1997). Differential item functioning in the Mini-mental State Examination in English- and Spanish-speaking older adults. Psychology and Aging, 12, 718–725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millsap, R. E. (2006). Comments on methods for the investigation of measurement bias in the Mini-mental State Examination. Medical Care, 44, S171–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morales, L. S., Flowers, C., Gutierrez, P., Kleinman, M. and Teresi, J. A. (2006). Item and scale differential functioning of the Mini-mental State Exam assessed using the differential item and test functioning (DFIT) Framework. Medical Care, 44, S143–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muraki, E. and Bock, D. (2003). PARSCALE for Windows. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph, 17.Google Scholar
StataCorp (2007). Stata Statistical Software: Release 10. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.Google Scholar
Syme, S. L., Marmot, M. G., Kagan, A., Kato, H. and Rhoads, G. (1975). Epidemiologic studies of coronary heart disease and stroke in Japanese men living in Japan, Hawaii and California: introduction. American Journal of Epidemiology, 102, 477–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teng, E. L. and Chui, H. C. (1987). The Modified Mini-mental State (3MS) examination. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 48, 314–318.Google ScholarPubMed
Teng, E. L. et al. (1994). The Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI): a practical test for cross-cultural epidemiological studies of dementia. International Psychogeriatrics, 6, 45–58, 62 (discussion).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teresi, J. A., Golden, R. R., Cross, P., Gurland, B., Kleinman, M. and Wilder, D. (1995). Item bias in cognitive screening measures: comparisons of elderly white, Afro-American, Hispanic and high and low education subgroups. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48, 473–483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teresi, J. A., Kleinman, M. and Ocepek-Welikson, K. (2000). Modern psychometric methods for detection of differential item functioning: application to cognitive assessment measures. Statistics in Medicine, 19, 1651–1683.3.0.CO;2-H>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teresi, J. A., Stewart, A. L., Morales, L. S. and Stahl, S. M. (2006). Measurement in a multi-ethnic society: overview to the special issue. Medical Care, 44, S3–S4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. et al. (1996). Prevalence of dementia in older Japanese-American men in Hawaii: the Honolulu-Asia Aging Study. JAMA, 276, 955–960.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Gibbons supplementary material

Figure 1.doc

Download Gibbons supplementary material(File)
File 29.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Gibbons supplementary material

Table 1.doc

Download Gibbons supplementary material(File)
File 64.5 KB