Paul A Pilkonis1, Lan Yu2, Nathan E Dodds3, Kelly L Johnston3, Suzanne M Lawrence3, Dennis C Daley3. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States. Electronic address: pilkonispa@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States; Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) includes five item banks for alcohol use. There are limited data, however, regarding their validity (e.g., convergent validity, responsiveness to change). To provide such data, we conducted a prospective study with 225 outpatients being treated for substance abuse. METHODS: Assessments were completed shortly after intake and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups. The alcohol item banks were administered as computerized adaptive tests (CATs). Fourteen CATs and one six-item short form were also administered from eight other PROMIS domains to generate a comprehensive health status profile. After modeling treatment outcome for the sample as a whole, correlates of outcome from the PROMIS health status profile were examined. RESULTS: For convergent validity, the largest correlation emerged between the PROMIS alcohol use score and the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (r=.79 at intake). Regarding treatment outcome, there were modest changes across the target problem of alcohol use and other domains of the PROMIS health status profile. However, significant heterogeneity was found in initial severity of drinking and in rates of change for both abstinence and severity of drinking during follow-up. This heterogeneity was associated with demographic (e.g., gender) and health-profile (e.g., emotional support, social participation) variables. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated the validity of PROMIS CATs, which require only 4-6 items in each domain. This efficiency makes it feasible to use a comprehensive health status profile within the substance use treatment setting, providing important prognostic information regarding abstinence and severity of drinking.
BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) includes five item banks for alcohol use. There are limited data, however, regarding their validity (e.g., convergent validity, responsiveness to change). To provide such data, we conducted a prospective study with 225 outpatients being treated for substance abuse. METHODS: Assessments were completed shortly after intake and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups. The alcohol item banks were administered as computerized adaptive tests (CATs). Fourteen CATs and one six-item short form were also administered from eight other PROMIS domains to generate a comprehensive health status profile. After modeling treatment outcome for the sample as a whole, correlates of outcome from the PROMIS health status profile were examined. RESULTS: For convergent validity, the largest correlation emerged between the PROMIS alcohol use score and the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (r=.79 at intake). Regarding treatment outcome, there were modest changes across the target problem of alcohol use and other domains of the PROMIS health status profile. However, significant heterogeneity was found in initial severity of drinking and in rates of change for both abstinence and severity of drinking during follow-up. This heterogeneity was associated with demographic (e.g., gender) and health-profile (e.g., emotional support, social participation) variables. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated the validity of PROMIS CATs, which require only 4-6 items in each domain. This efficiency makes it feasible to use a comprehensive health status profile within the substance use treatment setting, providing important prognostic information regarding abstinence and severity of drinking.
Authors: Frederick S Stinson; Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; W June Ruan; Boji Huang; Tulshi Saha Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2005-04-18 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; Ron D Hays; Jakob B Bjorner; Karon F Cook; Paul K Crane; Jeanne A Teresi; David Thissen; Dennis A Revicki; David J Weiss; Ronald K Hambleton; Honghu Liu; Richard Gershon; Steven P Reise; Jin-shei Lai; David Cella Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Daniel J Buysse; Lan Yu; Douglas E Moul; Anne Germain; Angela Stover; Nathan E Dodds; Kelly L Johnston; Melissa A Shablesky-Cade; Paul A Pilkonis Journal: Sleep Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Fiona S Graff; Thomas J Morgan; Elizabeth E Epstein; Barbara S McCrady; Sharon M Cook; Noelle K Jensen; Shalonda Kelly Journal: Am J Addict Date: 2009 Jul-Aug
Authors: James F Fries; James Witter; Matthias Rose; David Cella; Dinesh Khanna; Esi Morgan-DeWitt Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Miriam K Forbes; Matthew Sunderland; Ronald M Rapee; Philip J Batterham; Alison L Calear; Natacha Carragher; Camilo Ruggero; Mark Zimmerman; Andrew J Baillie; Samantha J Lynch; Louise Mewton; Tim Slade; Robert F Krueger Journal: Clin Psychol Sci Date: 2021-02-19
Authors: Laura E Gibbons; Rob Fredericksen; Joseph O Merrill; Mary E McCaul; Geetanjali Chander; Heidi Hutton; William B Lober; W Chris Mathews; Kenneth Mayer; Greer Burkholder; James H Willig; Michael J Mugavero; Michael S Saag; Mari M Kitahata; Todd C Edwards; Donald L Patrick; Heidi M Crane; Paul K Crane Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Veronica L Richards; Benjamin L Berey; Huiyin Lu; Nichole E Stetten; Rebecca J Fisk; Yan Wang; Babette Brumback; Robert L Cook Journal: Can J Addict Date: 2020-12
Authors: Eric S Kruger; Kelsey N Serier; Rory A Pfund; James R McKay; Katie Witkiewitz Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2021-09-30 Impact factor: 3.455