PROMIS methodology was used to create potential items for a pediatric social health scale. This methodology has been described in detail elsewhere and is summarized briefly here (DeWalt, Rothrock, Yount, & Stone, 2007 (link)). After the subdomains were defined, the next step was to identify and compile social health items from existing scales. Content experts categorized items as measuring social function or sociability. Items were eliminated that were redundant, vague, confusing, or disease specific. New items were written to ensure that there were items that measured a range of functioning across the construct. For example, the research team created items in areas that were not well represented in existing scales, such as social functioning in school and activities as well as with peers and family.
Focus groups provided additional input on domain coverage (Walsh et al., 2008 (link)) and individual items, and response options were reviewed in cognitive interviews with children in the target age range (including at least two children under age nine; Irwin et al., 2009 (link)). During cognitive interviews, children were asked to complete sets of items and then debrief on what the items meant to them and what information they used to answer the item. Cognitive interviews also covered the response options and time frames of items to ensure they made sense to the children. Items were revised as needed after the cognitive interviews and then underwent further cognitive review. Cognitive interviews were also conducted with items derived from existing scales that passed the selection process. These items were included in the final testing pool only if permission was granted from the developer.
There were initially 74 social health items classified as either social function (53 items) or sociability (21 items). All items included the context statement “In the past 7 days,” a statement in the past tense (e.g., “I was able to have fun with my friends”), and a standard 5-point set of response options: never, almost never, sometimes, often, and almost always.
Focus groups provided additional input on domain coverage (Walsh et al., 2008 (link)) and individual items, and response options were reviewed in cognitive interviews with children in the target age range (including at least two children under age nine; Irwin et al., 2009 (link)). During cognitive interviews, children were asked to complete sets of items and then debrief on what the items meant to them and what information they used to answer the item. Cognitive interviews also covered the response options and time frames of items to ensure they made sense to the children. Items were revised as needed after the cognitive interviews and then underwent further cognitive review. Cognitive interviews were also conducted with items derived from existing scales that passed the selection process. These items were included in the final testing pool only if permission was granted from the developer.
There were initially 74 social health items classified as either social function (53 items) or sociability (21 items). All items included the context statement “In the past 7 days,” a statement in the past tense (e.g., “I was able to have fun with my friends”), and a standard 5-point set of response options: never, almost never, sometimes, often, and almost always.
