Angela Senders1, Douglas Hanes2, Dennis Bourdette3, Ruth Whitham3, Lynne Shinto4. 1. Department of Neurology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA Helfgott Research Institute, National College of Natural Medicine, Portland, OR, USA senders@ohsu.edu. 2. Helfgott Research Institute, National College of Natural Medicine, Portland, OR, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA Department of Neurology, Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, OR, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes are important for clinical research and care, yet administering and scoring the questionnaires requires considerable effort and time. The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) could considerably reduce administrative obstacles and lessen survey burden for participants. OBJECTIVE: Assess the feasibility and validity of PROMIS, compared to commonly-used legacy measures for multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey, 133 participants with confirmed MS completed legacy surveys and PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Tests (CATs) for depression, anxiety, pain, fatigue and physical function. We conducted a multi-trait, multi-method analysis and verified results with confirmatory factor analysis. RESULTS: The correlations between PROMIS and the corresponding legacy measures were large (0.67 to 0.87). The multi-trait, multi-method criteria were generally well met, providing good evidence of the validity of PROMIS measures. PROMIS surveys asked fewer questions and required substantially less time to complete than the legacy scales. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide evidence of the construct validity of PROMIS for use with MS patients. Several aspects of the PROMIS CATs made them an important resource, including: (a) less time was required to complete them; (b) missing data was reduced; and (c) the automatic scoring referenced the general population. Our findings support the use of PROMIS in MS research and may have broader implications for clinical care, as well.
BACKGROUND:Patient-reported outcomes are important for clinical research and care, yet administering and scoring the questionnaires requires considerable effort and time. The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) could considerably reduce administrative obstacles and lessen survey burden for participants. OBJECTIVE: Assess the feasibility and validity of PROMIS, compared to commonly-used legacy measures for multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey, 133 participants with confirmed MS completed legacy surveys and PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Tests (CATs) for depression, anxiety, pain, fatigue and physical function. We conducted a multi-trait, multi-method analysis and verified results with confirmatory factor analysis. RESULTS: The correlations between PROMIS and the corresponding legacy measures were large (0.67 to 0.87). The multi-trait, multi-method criteria were generally well met, providing good evidence of the validity of PROMIS measures. PROMIS surveys asked fewer questions and required substantially less time to complete than the legacy scales. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide evidence of the construct validity of PROMIS for use with MS patients. Several aspects of the PROMIS CATs made them an important resource, including: (a) less time was required to complete them; (b) missing data was reduced; and (c) the automatic scoring referenced the general population. Our findings support the use of PROMIS in MS research and may have broader implications for clinical care, as well.
Authors: Lydia Chwastiak; Dawn M Ehde; Laura E Gibbons; Mark Sullivan; James D Bowen; George H Kraft Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Honghu Liu; David Cella; Richard Gershon; Jie Shen; Leo S Morales; William Riley; Ron D Hays Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-08-05 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Brenda Banwell; Michel Clanet; Jeffrey A Cohen; Massimo Filippi; Kazuo Fujihara; Eva Havrdova; Michael Hutchinson; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Paul O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Pierre Michel; Pascal Auquier; Karine Baumstarck; Jean Pelletier; Anderson Loundou; Badih Ghattas; Laurent Boyer Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-02-25 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Ana-Maria Orbai; Philip J Mease; Maarten de Wit; Umut Kalyoncu; Willemina Campbell; William Tillett; Lihi Eder; Musaab Elmamoun; Oliver FitzGerald; Dafna D Gladman; Niti Goel; Laure Gossec; Chris A Lindsay; Ingrid Steinkoenig; Philip S Helliwell; Neil J McHugh; Vibeke Strand; Alexis Ogdie Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Jordan T Jones; Adam C Carle; Janet Wootton; Brianna Liberio; Jiha Lee; Laura E Schanberg; Jun Ying; Esi Morgan DeWitt; Hermine I Brunner Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2016-11-28 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Jason M Guattery; Agnes Z Dardas; Michael Kelly; Aaron Chamberlain; Christopher McAndrew; Ryan P Calfee Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 4.176