Manshu Yang1,2, San Keller3, Jin-Mann S Lin4. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, 142 Flagg Road, Kingston, RI, 02881, USA. myang@uri.edu. 2. American Institutes for Research, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. myang@uri.edu. 3. American Institutes for Research, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® Fatigue Short Form 7a (PROMIS F-SF) among people with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS). METHODS: Analyses were conducted using data from the Multi-Site Clinical Assessment of ME/CFS study, which recruited participants from seven ME/CFS specialty clinics across the US. Baseline and follow-up data from ME/CFS participants and healthy controls were used. Ceiling/Floor effects, internal consistency reliability, differential item functioning (DIF), known-groups validity, and responsiveness were examined. RESULTS: The final sample comprised 549 ME/CFS participants at baseline, 386 of whom also had follow-up. At baseline, the sample mean of PROMIS F-SF T-score was 68.6 (US general population mean T-score of 50 and standard deviation of 10). The PROMIS F-SF demonstrated good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.84) and minimal floor/ceiling effects. No DIF was detected by age or sex for any item. This instrument also showed good known-groups validity with medium-to-large effect sizes (η2 = 0.08-0.69), with a monotonic increase of the fatigue T-score across ME/CFS participant groups with low, medium, and high functional impairment as measured by three different variables (p < 0.01), and with significantly higher fatigue T-scores among ME/CFS participants than healthy controls (p < 0.0001). Acceptable responsiveness was found with small-to-medium effect sizes (Guyatt's Responsiveness Statistic = 0.28-0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Study findings support the reliability and validity of PROMIS F-SF as a measure of fatigue for ME/CFS and lend support to the drug development tool submission for qualifying this measure to evaluate therapeutic effect in ME/CFS clinical trials.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® Fatigue Short Form 7a (PROMIS F-SF) among people with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS). METHODS: Analyses were conducted using data from the Multi-Site Clinical Assessment of ME/CFS study, which recruited participants from seven ME/CFS specialty clinics across the US. Baseline and follow-up data from ME/CFS participants and healthy controls were used. Ceiling/Floor effects, internal consistency reliability, differential item functioning (DIF), known-groups validity, and responsiveness were examined. RESULTS: The final sample comprised 549 ME/CFS participants at baseline, 386 of whom also had follow-up. At baseline, the sample mean of PROMIS F-SF T-score was 68.6 (US general population mean T-score of 50 and standard deviation of 10). The PROMIS F-SF demonstrated good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.84) and minimal floor/ceiling effects. No DIF was detected by age or sex for any item. This instrument also showed good known-groups validity with medium-to-large effect sizes (η2 = 0.08-0.69), with a monotonic increase of the fatigue T-score across ME/CFS participant groups with low, medium, and high functional impairment as measured by three different variables (p < 0.01), and with significantly higher fatigue T-scores among ME/CFS participants than healthy controls (p < 0.0001). Acceptable responsiveness was found with small-to-medium effect sizes (Guyatt's Responsiveness Statistic = 0.28-0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Study findings support the reliability and validity of PROMIS F-SF as a measure of fatigue for ME/CFS and lend support to the drug development tool submission for qualifying this measure to evaluate therapeutic effect in ME/CFS clinical trials.
Authors: Neil Aaronson; Jordi Alonso; Audrey Burnam; Kathleen N Lohr; Donald L Patrick; Edward Perrin; Ruth E Stein Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jetan H Badhiwala; Christopher D Witiw; Farshad Nassiri; Muhammad A Akbar; Blessing Jaja; Jefferson R Wilson; Michael G Fehlings Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 3.468
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: Karon F Cook; Alyssa M Bamer; Toni S Roddey; George H Kraft; Jiseon Kim; Dagmar Amtmann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-09-17 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Michele Reyes; Rosane Nisenbaum; David C Hoaglin; Elizabeth R Unger; Carol Emmons; Bonnie Randall; John A Stewart; Susan Abbey; James F Jones; Nelson Gantz; Sarah Minden; William C Reeves Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2003-07-14
Authors: William C Reeves; James F Jones; Elizabeth Maloney; Christine Heim; David C Hoaglin; Roumiana S Boneva; Marjorie Morrissey; Rebecca Devlin Journal: Popul Health Metr Date: 2007-06-08
Authors: Vitor H F Oliveira; Kristine M Erlandson; Paul F Cook; Catherine Jankowski; Samantha MaWhinney; Sahera Dirajlal-Fargo; Leslie Knaub; Chao-Pin Hsiao; Christine Horvat Davey; Allison R Webel Journal: J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care Date: 2022 Mar-Apr 01 Impact factor: 1.354