PROMIS

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) includes measures of physical, mental, and social health for adults and children.

Available references re: preferring Short Forms to CAT for prospective studies?

More
7 months 3 weeks ago #685
ap77 replied the topic: Available references re: preferring Short Forms to CAT for prospective studies?

Thank you for the detailed reply and suggested references. My orthopedic clinic has been issuing older static PROMIS forms to patients for prospective evaluation (pre- and post-operatively), and we have the opportunity to switch to CAT forms in the near future. I think making the switch might give us some interesting data to compare, as well as reducing response burden, etc.

Item-level comparisons were key to my initial query to HM.net, but my message was not clear. When we have evaluated individual PROMIS items to ostensibly related individual legacy PRO items, there are some pretty neat findings.

Thank you again for the reply!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
7 months 3 weeks ago #684
HealthMeasures replied the topic: Available references re: preferring Short Forms to CAT for prospective studies?

The evidence suggests that PROMIS forms are interchangeable (Choi et al. 2010), but a small amount of error or difference is introduced when switching, so it is preferable not to switch forms (of any kind) in the midst of a longitudinal study if it can be helped. While autocorrelation would suggest that SFs are more “comparable” or stable than CATs over time, any number of factors could influence the ability to detect and quantify change. We cannot conclude one is better than another in longitudinal studies comparing scores over time. It is highly contextual, so it may not be possible to generalize across banks and different SFs. But change seems similar in studies with both PROMIS SF8 and CAT in this study (Flynn et al, 2015). For a fuller discussion, see also Devine et al. (2016). Of course, if you need to compare changes in symptoms/function at the item level (which might be useful in some clinical contexts), CATs wouldn’t allow you to do that.

Flynn, K., Dew, M., Lin, L., Fawzy, M., Graham, F., Hahn, E., . . . Weinfurt, K. (2015). Reliability and Construct Validity of PROMIS® Measures for Patients with Heart Failure Who Undergo Heart Transplant. Quality of Life Research, 24(11), 2591-2599. 10.1007/s11136-015-1010-y

Choi, S., Reise, S., Pilkonis, P., Hays, R., & Cella, D. (2010). Efficiency of Static and Computer Adaptive Short Forms Compared to Full-Length Measures of Depressive Symptoms. Quality of Life Research, 19(1), 125-136. dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9560-5

Devine, J., Fliege, H., Kocalevent, R., Mierke, A., Klapp, B. F., & Rose, M. (2016). Evaluation of Computerized Adaptive Tests (CATs) for longitudinal monitoring of depression, anxiety, and stress reactions. Journal of Affective Disorders, 190, 846-853.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 8 months ago #533
ap77 created the topic: Available references re: preferring Short Forms to CAT for prospective studies?

Hi, I am hoping a moderator or researcher viewing this forum can point me to published articles or grey literature describing rationale and evidence that supports a preference for short forms over computer adaptive testing for prospective assessment. It seems obvious that static items would be more directly comparable over time, but is there a published study that supports this?

Thank you!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: HealthMeasures