Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 May;22(5):537-544.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.004.

PROMIS® Adult Health Profiles: Efficient Short-Form Measures of Seven Health Domains

Affiliations

PROMIS® Adult Health Profiles: Efficient Short-Form Measures of Seven Health Domains

David Cella et al. Value Health. 2019 May.

Abstract

Background: There is a need for valid self-report measures of core health-related quality of life (HRQoL) domains.

Objective: To derive brief, reliable and valid health profile measures from the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) item banks.

Methods: Literature review, investigator consensus process, item response theory (IRT) analysis, and expert review of scaling results from multiple PROMIS data sets. We developed 3 profile measures ranging in length from 29 to 57 questions. These profiles assess important HRQoL domains with highly informative subsets of items from respective item banks and yield reliable information across mild-to-severe levels of HRQoL experiences. Each instrument assesses the domains of pain interference, fatigue, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbance, physical function, and social function using 4-, 6-, and 8-item short forms for each domain, and an average pain intensity domain score, using a 0-10 numeric rating scale.

Results: With few exceptions, all domain short forms within the profile measures were highly reliable across at least 3 standard deviation (30 T-score) units and were strongly correlated with the full bank scores. Construct validity with ratings of general health and quality of life was demonstrated. Information to inform statistical power for clinical and general population samples is also provided.

Conclusions: Although these profile measures have been used widely, with summary scoring routines published, description of their development, reliability, and initial validity has not been published until this article. Further evaluation of these measures and clinical applications are encouraged.

Keywords: PROMIS®; health-related quality of life; information system; patient-reported outcome measurement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Test information functions by domain.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Short form correlations with full banks by domain.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Estimated power to detect a small effect (d = 0.2) in a general population for each of the short forms by domain. SF indicates short form.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Estimated power to detect a small effect (d = 0.2) in a clinical population (1 SD below mean) for each of the short forms by domain. SF indicates short form.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Mean T-scores by domain based on responses to the item: “In general, would you say your health is . .” The y-axis for PHF and SOR is on the right side of the panel, enabling a profile plot in which the upper part of each plot is consistently worse than the lower part of the plot. ANX indicates Anxiety; DEP, Depression; FAT, Fatigue; PAI, Pain Interference; PHF, Physical Function; SF, short form; SLP, Sleep Disturbance; SOR, Satisfaction with Participation in Social Roles and Activities.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Mean T-scores by domain based on responses to the item: “In general, would you say your quality of life is … ” The y-axis for PHF and SOR is on the right side of the panel, enabling a profile plot in which the upper part of each plot is consistently worse than the lower part of the plot. ANX indicates Anxiety; DEP, Depression; FAT, Fatigue; PAI, Pain Interference; PHF, Physical Function; SF, short form; SLP, Sleep Disturbance; SOR, Satisfaction with Participation in Social Roles and Activities.

References

    1. Ahmed S, Berzon RA, Revicki DA, et al. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: implications for clinical practice and health care policy. Med Care. 2012;50(12):1060–1070. - PubMed
    1. Basch E New Frontiers in patient-reported outcomes: adverse event reporting, comparative effectiveness, and quality assessment. Annu Rev Med. 2014;65(1):307–317. - PubMed
    1. Rotenstein LS, Huckman RS, Wagle NW. Making patients and doctors happier—the potential of patient-reported outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(14):1309–1312. - PubMed
    1. Baumhauer JF. Patient-reported outcomes—are they living up to their potential? N Engl J Med. 2017;377(1):6–9. - PubMed
    1. Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, et al. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179–1194. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types