Johanna C Menard1, Pamela S Hinds, Shana S Jacobs, Katie Cranston, Jichuan Wang, Darren A DeWalt, Heather E Gross. 1. Author Affiliations: Department of Nursing Research and Quality Outcomes (Ms Menard and Dr Hinds), Division of Nursing (Ms Cranston), Division of Oncology (Dr Jacobs), and Division of Biostatistics and Study Methodology (Dr Wang), Children's National Medical Center; and The George Washington University (Drs Hinds, Jacobs, and Wang), Washington, DC; and Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Ms Gross and Dr DeWalt).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes related to symptoms, function, and quality of life during and following cancer treatment can guide care for pediatric cancer patients. To advance the science of patient-reported outcomes, the National Institutes of Health funded the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess feasibility and acceptability of the PROMIS pediatric measures, as defined by enrollment and attrition rates as well as missingness by measure, item, participant, and assessment time point. METHODS: Eight- to 18-year-olds participated in 2 studies: PROMIS I, a cross-sectional study of children in active cancer treatment or survivorship, and PROMIS II, a longitudinal study with 3 assessment time points for children receiving curative treatment. RESULTS: PROMIS I (n = 200) and PROMIS II (n = 94) had enrollment rates of 92.5% and 89.7%, respectively. For PROMIS I, measure missingness was acceptable (8% missed any measures) and was not related to other study variables. For PROMIS II, measure missingness was minimal (0.8%), and item-level missingness was relatively low. In general, items that were skipped asked about experiences that participants had not encountered in the past 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: In both studies, the PROMIS instruments demonstrated good feasibility and acceptability among pediatric cancer patients. Overall, we had high enrollment, low attrition, and acceptable rates of measure and item missingness. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our results demonstrate that PROMIS measures are acceptable to 8- to 18-year-olds in different points of cancer care and feasible for use in pediatric cancer inpatient and outpatient settings.
BACKGROUND:Patient-reported outcomes related to symptoms, function, and quality of life during and following cancer treatment can guide care for pediatric cancerpatients. To advance the science of patient-reported outcomes, the National Institutes of Health funded the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess feasibility and acceptability of the PROMIS pediatric measures, as defined by enrollment and attrition rates as well as missingness by measure, item, participant, and assessment time point. METHODS: Eight- to 18-year-olds participated in 2 studies: PROMIS I, a cross-sectional study of children in active cancer treatment or survivorship, and PROMIS II, a longitudinal study with 3 assessment time points for children receiving curative treatment. RESULTS: PROMIS I (n = 200) and PROMIS II (n = 94) had enrollment rates of 92.5% and 89.7%, respectively. For PROMIS I, measure missingness was acceptable (8% missed any measures) and was not related to other study variables. For PROMIS II, measure missingness was minimal (0.8%), and item-level missingness was relatively low. In general, items that were skipped asked about experiences that participants had not encountered in the past 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: In both studies, the PROMIS instruments demonstrated good feasibility and acceptability among pediatric cancerpatients. Overall, we had high enrollment, low attrition, and acceptable rates of measure and item missingness. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our results demonstrate that PROMIS measures are acceptable to 8- to 18-year-olds in different points of cancer care and feasible for use in pediatric cancer inpatient and outpatient settings.
Authors: A E Kazak; B Penati; B A Boyer; B Himelstein; P Brophy; M K Waibel; G F Blackall; R Daller; K Johnson Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 1996-10
Authors: Pamela S Hinds; Suzanne L Nuss; Kathleen S Ruccione; Janice S Withycombe; Shana Jacobs; Holly DeLuca; Charisse Faulkner; Yang Liu; Yao I Cheng; Heather E Gross; Jichuan Wang; Darren A DeWalt Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Pamela S Hinds; Jie Yang; Jami S Gattuso; Marilyn Hockenberry; Heather Jones; Sue Zupanec; Chenghong Li; Valerie McLaughlin Crabtree; Belinda N Mandrell; Robert A Schoumacher; Kelly Vallance; Stacy Sanford; Deo Kumar Srivastava Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: J J Collins; M E Byrnes; I J Dunkel; J Lapin; T Nadel; H T Thaler; T Polyak; B Rapkin; R K Portenoy Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Pamela S Hinds; Jami S Gattuso; Catherine A Billups; Nancy K West; Jianrong Wu; Cecilia Rivera; Juan Quintana; Milena Villarroel; Najat C Daw Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-05-18 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Smita Bhatia; Meriel E M Jenney; Eric Wu; Monica K Bogue; Todd H Rockwood; James H Feusner; Debra L Friedman; Leslie L Robison; Robert L Kane Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Pamela S Hinds; Catherine A Billups; Xueyuan Cao; Jami S Gattuso; Elizabeth Burghen; Nancy West; Jeffrey E Rubnitz; Najat C Daw Journal: Eur J Oncol Nurs Date: 2008-10-15 Impact factor: 2.398
Authors: Conor M Jones; Justin N Baker; Rachel M Keesey; Ruth J Eliason; Jennifer Q Lanctot; Jennifer L Clegg; Belinda N Mandrell; Kirsten K Ness; Kevin R Krull; Deokumar Srivastava; Christopher B Forrest; Melissa M Hudson; Leslie L Robison; I-Chan Huang Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Carlton Dampier; Byron Jaeger; Heather E Gross; Vaughn Barry; Lloyd Edwards; Yang Lui; Darren A DeWalt; Bryce B Reeve Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2016-02-08 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Jennifer L Beaumont; Cindy J Nowinski; David Cella; William F Hartsell; John Han-Chih Chang; Peter E Manley; Stewart Goldman Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2017-08-08 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Darren A DeWalt; Heather E Gross; Debbie S Gipson; David T Selewski; Esi Morgan DeWitt; Carlton D Dampier; Pamela S Hinds; I-Chan Huang; David Thissen; James W Varni Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; Lloyd J Edwards; Byron C Jaeger; Pamela S Hinds; Carlton Dampier; Debbie S Gipson; David T Selewski; Jonathan P Troost; David Thissen; Vaughn Barry; Heather E Gross; Darren A DeWalt Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-09-07 Impact factor: 4.147