Jeanne A Teresi1,2,3, Katja Ocepek-Welikson2, Karon F Cook4, Marjorie Kleinman1, Mildred Ramirez2,3, M Carrington Reid3, Albert Siu5. 1. New York State Psychiatric Institute. 2. Research Division, Hebrew Home at Riverdale; RiverSpring Health. 3. Division of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College. 4. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University. 5. Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine.
Abstract
Reducing the response burden of standardized pain measures is desirable, particularly for individuals who are frail or live with chronic illness, e.g., those suffering from cancer and those in palliative care. The Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) project addressed this issue with the provision of computerized adaptive tests (CAT) and short form measures that can be used clinically and in research. Although there has been substantial evaluation of PROMIS item banks, little is known about the performance of PROMIS short forms, particularly in ethnically diverse groups. Reviewed in this article are findings related to the differential item functioning (DIF) and reliability of the PROMIS pain interference short forms across diverse sociodemographic groups. METHODS: DIF hypotheses were generated for the PROMIS short form pain interference items. Initial analyses tested item response theory (IRT) model assumptions of unidimensionality and local independence. Dimensionality was evaluated using factor analytic methods; local dependence (LD) was tested using IRT-based LD indices. Wald tests were used to examine group differences in IRT parameters, and to test DIF hypotheses. A second DIF-detection method used in sensitivity analyses was based on ordinal logistic regression with a latent IRT-derived conditioning variable. Magnitude and impact of DIF were investigated, and reliability and item and scale information statistics were estimated. RESULTS: The reliability of the short form item set was excellent. However, there were a few items with high local dependency, which affected the estimation of the final discrimination parameters. As a result, the item, "How much did pain interfere with enjoyment of social activities?" was excluded in the DIF analyses for all subgroup comparisons. No items were hypothesized to show DIF for race and ethnicity; however, five items showed DIF after adjustment for multiple comparisons in both primary and sensitivity analyses: ability to concentrate, enjoyment of recreational activities, tasks away from home, participation in social activities, and socializing with others. The magnitude of DIF was small and the impact negligible. Three items were consistently identified with DIF for education: enjoyment of life, ability to concentrate, and enjoyment of recreational activities. No item showed DIF above the magnitude threshold and the impact of DIF on the overall measure was minimal. No item showed gender DIF after correction for multiple comparisons in the primary analyses. Four items showed consistent age DIF: enjoyment of life, ability to concentrate, day to day activities, and enjoyment of recreational activities, none with primary magnitude values above threshold. Conditional on the pain state, Spanish speakers were hypothesized to report less pain interference on one item, enjoyment of life. The DIF findings confirmed the hypothesis; however, the magnitude was small. Using an arbitrary cutoff point of theta (θ) ≥ 1.0 to classify respondents with acute pain interference, the highest number of changes were for the education groups analyses. There were 231 respondents (4% of the total sample) who changed from the designation of no acute pain interference to acute interference after the DIF adjustment. There was no change in the designations for race/ethnic subgroups, and a small number of changes for respondents aged 65 to 84. CONCLUSIONS: Although significant DIF was observed after correction for multiple comparisons, all DIF was of low magnitude and impact. However, some individual-level impact was observed for low education groups. Reliability estimates were high. Thus, the PROMIS short form pain items examined in this ethnically diverse sample performed relatively well; although one item was problematic and removed from the analyses. It is concluded that the majority of the PROMIS pain interference short form items can be recommended for use among ethnically diverse groups, including those in palliative care and with cancer and chronic illness.
Reducing the response burden of standardized pain measures is desirable, particularly for individuals who are frail or live with chronic illness, e.g., those suffering from cancer and those in palliative care. The Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) project addressed this issue with the provision of computerized adaptive tests (CAT) and short form measures that can be used clinically and in research. Although there has been substantial evaluation of PROMIS item banks, little is known about the performance of PROMIS short forms, particularly in ethnically diverse groups. Reviewed in this article are findings related to the differential item functioning (DIF) and reliability of the PROMIS pain interference short forms across diverse sociodemographic groups. METHODS: DIF hypotheses were generated for the PROMIS short form pain interference items. Initial analyses tested item response theory (IRT) model assumptions of unidimensionality and local independence. Dimensionality was evaluated using factor analytic methods; local dependence (LD) was tested using IRT-based LD indices. Wald tests were used to examine group differences in IRT parameters, and to test DIF hypotheses. A second DIF-detection method used in sensitivity analyses was based on ordinal logistic regression with a latent IRT-derived conditioning variable. Magnitude and impact of DIF were investigated, and reliability and item and scale information statistics were estimated. RESULTS: The reliability of the short form item set was excellent. However, there were a few items with high local dependency, which affected the estimation of the final discrimination parameters. As a result, the item, "How much did pain interfere with enjoyment of social activities?" was excluded in the DIF analyses for all subgroup comparisons. No items were hypothesized to show DIF for race and ethnicity; however, five items showed DIF after adjustment for multiple comparisons in both primary and sensitivity analyses: ability to concentrate, enjoyment of recreational activities, tasks away from home, participation in social activities, and socializing with others. The magnitude of DIF was small and the impact negligible. Three items were consistently identified with DIF for education: enjoyment of life, ability to concentrate, and enjoyment of recreational activities. No item showed DIF above the magnitude threshold and the impact of DIF on the overall measure was minimal. No item showed gender DIF after correction for multiple comparisons in the primary analyses. Four items showed consistent age DIF: enjoyment of life, ability to concentrate, day to day activities, and enjoyment of recreational activities, none with primary magnitude values above threshold. Conditional on the pain state, Spanish speakers were hypothesized to report less pain interference on one item, enjoyment of life. The DIF findings confirmed the hypothesis; however, the magnitude was small. Using an arbitrary cutoff point of theta (θ) ≥ 1.0 to classify respondents with acute pain interference, the highest number of changes were for the education groups analyses. There were 231 respondents (4% of the total sample) who changed from the designation of no acute pain interference to acute interference after the DIF adjustment. There was no change in the designations for race/ethnic subgroups, and a small number of changes for respondents aged 65 to 84. CONCLUSIONS: Although significant DIF was observed after correction for multiple comparisons, all DIF was of low magnitude and impact. However, some individual-level impact was observed for low education groups. Reliability estimates were high. Thus, the PROMIS short form pain items examined in this ethnically diverse sample performed relatively well; although one item was problematic and removed from the analyses. It is concluded that the majority of the PROMIS pain interference short form items can be recommended for use among ethnically diverse groups, including those in palliative care and with cancer and chronic illness.
Authors: Maria Orlando Orlando Edelen; David Thissen; Jeanne A Teresi; Marjorie Kleinman; Katja Ocepek-Welikson Journal: Med Care Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 2.983
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: Jacek A Kopec; Maziar Badii; Mario McKenna; Viviane D Lima; Eric C Sayre; Marcel Dvorak Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2008-05-20 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: David Cella; Susan Yount; Nan Rothrock; Richard Gershon; Karon Cook; Bryce Reeve; Deborah Ader; James F Fries; Bonnie Bruce; Mattias Rose Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Arnold L Potosky; Kristi D Graves; Li Lin; Wei Pan; Jane M Fall-Dickson; Jaeil Ahn; Kristin M Ferguson; Theresa H M Keegan; Lisa E Paddock; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Rosemary Cress; Bryce B Reeve Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Elizabeth D Cox; Sarah K Dobrozsi; Christopher B Forrest; Wendy E Gerhardt; Harald Kliems; Bryce B Reeve; Nan E Rothrock; Jin-Shei Lai; Jacob M Svenson; Lindsay A Thompson; Thuy Dan N Tran; Carole A Tucker Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Ayse S Cakmak; Erick A Perez Alday; Giulia Da Poian; Ali Bahrami Rad; Thomas J Metzler; Thomas C Neylan; Stacey L House; Francesca L Beaudoin; Xinming An; Jennifer S Stevens; Donglin Zeng; Sarah D Linnstaedt; Tanja Jovanovic; Laura T Germine; Kenneth A Bollen; Scott L Rauch; Christopher A Lewandowski; Phyllis L Hendry; Sophia Sheikh; Alan B Storrow; Paul I Musey; John P Haran; Christopher W Jones; Brittany E Punches; Robert A Swor; Nina T Gentile; Meghan E McGrath; Mark J Seamon; Kamran Mohiuddin; Anna M Chang; Claire Pearson; Robert M Domeier; Steven E Bruce; Brian J O'Neil; Niels K Rathlev; Leon D Sanchez; Robert H Pietrzak; Jutta Joormann; Deanna M Barch; Diego A Pizzagalli; Steven E Harte; James M Elliott; Ronald C Kessler; Karestan C Koenen; Kerry J Ressler; Samuel A Mclean; Qiao Li; Gari D Clifford Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2021-08-06 Impact factor: 7.021
Authors: Toufic R Jildeh; Joshua P Castle; Muhammad J Abbas; Miriam E Dash; Noel O Akioyamen; Kelechi R Okoroha Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2021-08-05
Authors: Omar Kadri; Toufic R Jildeh; Jason E Meldau; Jacob Blanchett; Peter Borowsky; Stephanie Muh; Vasilios Moutzouros; Eric C Makhni Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-08-14
Authors: Daniel L Hertz; Karen Lisa Smith; Yuhua Zong; Christina L Gersch; Andrea M Pesch; Jennifer Lehman; Amanda L Blackford; N Lynn Henry; Kelley M Kidwell; James M Rae; Vered Stearns Journal: Front Genet Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 4.599