Dimensionality and invariance of ADL, IADL, BI-M2/WG-SS, and GALI in large surveys in France (2008–2014) and implications for measuring disability in epidemiology

Abstract Background The epidemiological investigation and surveillance of disability requires well-constructed, invariant, and, if possible, exchangeable measures. However, the current or recommended measures have not been thoroughly investigated with respect to these issues. Here we examined the dimensional structure and invariance of four measures across sociodemographic groups: Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), Budapest Initiative Mark 2 (BI-M2) and Washington Group on Disability Statistics Short Set (WG-SS), and Global Activity Limitation Indicator (GALI). Methods We used data from three large nationwide representative surveys conducted in France between 2008 and 2014. The surveys included these four measures and classical and modern approaches (correlations, principal component analysis, Rasch modeling) were used to assess their dimensional structure as well as their invariance through differential item functioning (DIF) for sociodemographic characteristics. Polytomous logistic regression models were used to assess gradients in health inequalities associated with these measures. Results For many items of ADL, IADL, and BI-M2/WG-SS, we consistently observed disordered response thresholds, rejection of unidimensionality, and DIF evidence for sociodemographic characteristics across the survey samples. Health inequality gradients were erratic. In addition, it was impossible to identify a common continuum for GALI, ADL, IADL, and BI-M2/WG-SS or their constituent items. Conclusion This study warns against the current practice of investigating disability in epidemiology using measures that are unsuitable for epidemiological use, incommensurable, and inadequate regarding the basic requisites of dimensionality and invariance. Developing invariant measures and equating them along a common continuum to enlarge the common bases of measurement should therefore be a priority.