From: Psychometric validation of the Laval developmental benchmarks scale for family medicine
Linacre’s (2004) guidelines | Result |
---|---|
1. At least 10 observations of each category | There were at least 10 observations per response option (54 observations in the first option; 3615 in the second; and 22,023 in the third). |
2. Regular observation distribution | Distribution of observations across response options was irregular, meaning that option 3 was clearly the most frequent option, followed by option 2, while option 1 was seldom chosen. |
3. Average measures advance monotonically with category | Average ability estimates advanced monotonically with options going from −1.10 logits (option 1) to 2.77 logits (option 2) and then to 6.59 logits (option 3). |
4. Outfit mean-squares less than 2.0 | Infit and outfit indices were acceptable, all comprised between .99 and 1.30. |
5. Step calibrations advance | Step calibrations advanced, indicating no disordered thresholds. The step between option 1 and 2 was estimated at −3.61 logits, and the step between option 2 and 3 was estimated at 3.61 logits. |
6. Ratings imply measures, and measures imply ratings | Congruence between measures and ratings as well as between ratings and measures was generally good. It varied between 66 and 93% for options 2 and 3. For option 1, the congruence between measures and ratings was acceptable at 55%, but the congruence between ratings and measures was at 11%. |
7. Step difficulties advance by at least 1.4 logit | The distance of 7.22 logits between the two steps was larger than 1.4 logits. |
8. Step difficulties advance by less than 5.0 logits | The distance of 7.22 logits between the two steps was larger than 5 logits. |