James F Fries1, James Witter, Matthias Rose, David Cella, Dinesh Khanna, Esi Morgan-DeWitt. 1. From the Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; National Institutes of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), Bethesda, Maryland, USA; Medical School Charité, University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Medicine, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati School of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires record health information directly from research participants because observers may not accurately represent the patient perspective. Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a US National Institutes of Health cooperative group charged with bringing PRO to a new level of precision and standardization across diseases by item development and use of item response theory (IRT). METHODS: With IRT methods, improved items are calibrated on an underlying concept to form an item bank for a "domain" such as physical function (PF). The most informative items can be combined to construct efficient "instruments" such as 10-item or 20-item PF static forms. Each item is calibrated on the basis of the probability that a given person will respond at a given level, and the ability of the item to discriminate people from one another. Tailored forms may cover any desired level of the domain being measured. Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) selects the best items to sharpen the estimate of a person's functional ability, based on prior responses to earlier questions. PROMIS item banks have been improved with experience from several thousand items, and are calibrated on over 21,000 respondents. RESULTS: In areas tested to date, PROMIS PF instruments are superior or equal to Health Assessment Questionnaire and Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36 Survey legacy instruments in clarity, translatability, patient importance, reliability, and sensitivity to change. CONCLUSION: Precise measures, such as PROMIS, efficiently incorporate patient self-report of health into research, potentially reducing research cost by lowering sample size requirements. The advent of routine IRT applications has the potential to transform PRO measurement.
OBJECTIVE:Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires record health information directly from research participants because observers may not accurately represent the patient perspective. Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a US National Institutes of Health cooperative group charged with bringing PRO to a new level of precision and standardization across diseases by item development and use of item response theory (IRT). METHODS: With IRT methods, improved items are calibrated on an underlying concept to form an item bank for a "domain" such as physical function (PF). The most informative items can be combined to construct efficient "instruments" such as 10-item or 20-item PF static forms. Each item is calibrated on the basis of the probability that a given person will respond at a given level, and the ability of the item to discriminate people from one another. Tailored forms may cover any desired level of the domain being measured. Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) selects the best items to sharpen the estimate of a person's functional ability, based on prior responses to earlier questions. PROMIS item banks have been improved with experience from several thousand items, and are calibrated on over 21,000 respondents. RESULTS: In areas tested to date, PROMIS PF instruments are superior or equal to Health Assessment Questionnaire and Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36 Survey legacy instruments in clarity, translatability, patient importance, reliability, and sensitivity to change. CONCLUSION: Precise measures, such as PROMIS, efficiently incorporate patient self-report of health into research, potentially reducing research cost by lowering sample size requirements. The advent of routine IRT applications has the potential to transform PRO measurement.
Authors: Casey M Beleckas; Jason Guattery; Aaron M Chamberlain; Taleef Khan; Michael P Kelly; Ryan P Calfee Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2018-12-15 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: Matthew D Finkelman; Ronald J Kulich; Kevin L Zacharoff; Niels Smits; Britta E Magnuson; Jinghui Dong; Stephen F Butler Journal: Pain Med Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Claire E H Barber; JoAnn Zell; Jinoos Yazdany; Aileen M Davis; Laura Cappelli; Linda Ehrlich-Jones; Donna Everix; J Carter Thorne; Victoria Bohm; Lisa Suter; Alex Limanni; Kaleb Michaud Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Roxanne E Jensen; Nan E Rothrock; Esi M DeWitt; Brennan Spiegel; Carole A Tucker; Heidi M Crane; Christopher B Forrest; Donald L Patrick; Rob Fredericksen; Lisa M Shulman; David Cella; Paul K Crane Journal: Med Care Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Ashley Wilder Smith; Sandra A Mitchell; Cheryl K De Aguiar; Claudia Moy; William T Riley; Molly V Wagster; Ellen M Werner Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Paul A Pilkonis; Lan Yu; Nathan E Dodds; Kelly L Johnston; Catherine C Maihoefer; Suzanne M Lawrence Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2014-05-29 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Melisa L Wong; Steven M Paul; Judy Mastick; Christine Ritchie; Michael A Steinman; Louise C Walter; Christine Miaskowski Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 3.612