Nan E Rothrock1, Dagmar Amtmann2, Karon F Cook3. 1. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine of Northwestern University, 625 N. Michigan Ave Suite 2700, Chicago, IL, 60660, USA. n-rothrock@northwestern.edu. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine of Northwestern University, 625 N. Michigan Ave Suite 2700, Chicago, IL, 60660, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate score interpretation is required for the appropriate use of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To create and evaluate figures (T-score Maps) to facilitate the interpretation of scores on Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures. METHODS: For 21 PROMIS® short forms, item-level information was used to predict the most probable responses to items for the range of possible scores on each short form. Predicted responses were then "mapped" graphically along the range of possible scores. In a previously conducted longitudinal study, 1594 adult participants with chronic conditions (e.g., multiple sclerosis) responded to four items each of a subset of these PROMIS short forms. Participants' responses to these items were compared to those predicted by the T-score Maps. Difference scores were calculated between observed and predicted scores, and Spearman correlations were calculated. RESULTS: We constructed T-score Maps for 21 PROMIS short forms for adults and pediatric self- and parent-proxy report. For the clinical population, participants' actual responses were strongly correlated with their predicted responses (r = 0.762 to 0.950). The majority of predicted responses exactly matched observed responses (range 69.5% to 85.3%). CONCLUSION: Results support the validity of the predicted responses used to construct T-score Maps. T-score Maps are ready to be tested as interpretation aids in a variety of applications.
BACKGROUND: Accurate score interpretation is required for the appropriate use of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To create and evaluate figures (T-score Maps) to facilitate the interpretation of scores on Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures. METHODS: For 21 PROMIS® short forms, item-level information was used to predict the most probable responses to items for the range of possible scores on each short form. Predicted responses were then "mapped" graphically along the range of possible scores. In a previously conducted longitudinal study, 1594 adult participants with chronic conditions (e.g., multiple sclerosis) responded to four items each of a subset of these PROMIS short forms. Participants' responses to these items were compared to those predicted by the T-score Maps. Difference scores were calculated between observed and predicted scores, and Spearman correlations were calculated. RESULTS: We constructed T-score Maps for 21 PROMIS short forms for adults and pediatric self- and parent-proxy report. For the clinical population, participants' actual responses were strongly correlated with their predicted responses (r = 0.762 to 0.950). The majority of predicted responses exactly matched observed responses (range 69.5% to 85.3%). CONCLUSION: Results support the validity of the predicted responses used to construct T-score Maps. T-score Maps are ready to be tested as interpretation aids in a variety of applications.
Authors: Kaitlyn L Gamwell; Constance A Mara; Kevin A Hommel; Susmita Kashikar-Zuck; Natoshia R Cunningham Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2021-12-17 Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Kelly L Schoenbeck; Ehab Atallah; Li Lin; Kevin P Weinfurt; Jorge Cortes; Michael W N Deininger; Vamsi Kota; Richard A Larson; Michael J Mauro; Vivian G Oehler; Javier Pinilla-Ibarz; Jerald P Radich; Charles A Schiffer; Neil P Shah; Richard T Silver; James E Thompson; Kathryn E Flynn Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Annika Döhmen; Milan Kock; Alexander Obbarius; Christoph Paul Klapproth; Felix Fischer; Matthias Rose Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-10-01 Impact factor: 3.440
Authors: Lena M Hassen; Rana A Albarrak; Reem A Albahlal; Dimah K Alsaqabi; Ikhlass M Hassen; Maha H Daghestani; Eman M Alqurtas; Abdulaziz T Alkhalaf; Mohammed K Bedaiwi; Mohammed A Omair; Ibrahim A Almaghlouth Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 3.440
Authors: Thomas Ellis; Dave Kohlrieser; Brian Rao; Keelan Enseki; Adam Popchak; RobRoy L Martin Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2021-04-18 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Savannah V Wooten; Uwe Mittag; José Ramón Alvero Cruz; Sten Stray-Gundersen; Fabian Hoffmann; Sarah Michély; Stefan Möstl; Wolfram Sies; Edwin Mulder; Philipp Rauschendorfer; Philip D Chilibeck; Jörn Rittweger; Hirofumi Tanaka Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Philip J van der Wees; Jeroen D Boogaarts; Edith Nobels-Janssen; Inger L Abma; Wim I M Verhagen; Ronald H M A Bartels Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2021-04-16 Impact factor: 2.474