A Differential Item Functioning (DIF) Study of the Infection Control Standard Isolation Precaution Instrument Across Gender and Major Among Healthcare Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Measuring healthcare workers’ (HCWs) knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) regarding isolation precaution is essential for infection control which needs a valid and reliable instrument. Objectives: This study aimed to assess differential item functioning (DIF) across gender and major for the knowledge and practice items of the questionnaire, previously designed in Shiraz, Iran. Methods: This cross-sectional survey was conducted on 1070 participants (males/females: 306/764; medical students/nurses: 466/624). The study instrument had three subscales with nine questions for each KAP subscale. The Mantel-Haenszel (MH) statistic was used. The DIF and differential test functioning (DTF) analyses were also performed in this study. Results: There were very similar DIF outcomes for the knowledge and practice subscales, with one or two items indicating moderate DIF but comparable total scores across genders. Across majors, several items showed large DIF for both subscales. It was found that large DTF affects major for both subscales. Conclusions: Our findings indicated large DIF and DTF levels of the questionnaire among medical students and nursing groups. More attention should be paid when developing the items. This study shows the importance of paying attention to valid evidence for instruments developed within the field of healthcare.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".