Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 56, Issue 12 , Pages 1142-1145, December 2003

Clinimetrics vs. psychometrics: an unnecessary distinction

Kunin-Lunenfeld Applied Research Unit, Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, 3560 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON M6A 2E1, Canada

Accepted 15 August 2003.

Abstract 

The term “clinimetrics” was introduced by Feinstein to describe an approach to scale development that ostensibly is different from the more traditional “psychometrics.” I argue that, for a number of reasons, it is time for this term to retire from the scene. I show that the clinimetric approach is neither new nor unique, but is rather a subset of psychometrics. Further, because the majority of new developments in scale construction (e.g., new variations of the intraclass correlation, item response theory, structural equation modeling, and cognitive theories) are reported in the psychometric literature, use of the term “clinimetric,” especially among people not exposed to traditional test theory, cuts them off from a rich source of information.

Keywords: Clinimetrics, Psychometrics

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0895-4356(03)00356-1

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.08.011

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 56, Issue 12 , Pages 1142-1145, December 2003