Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 19, Issue 7, pp 1035–1044 | Cite as

Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): item bank development and testing

  • Elizabeth A. Hahn
  • Robert F. DeVellis
  • Rita K. Bode
  • Sofia F. Garcia
  • Liana D. Castel
  • Susan V. Eisen
  • Hayden B. Bosworth
  • Allen W. Heinemann
  • Nan Rothrock
  • David Cella
  • on behalf of the PROMIS Cooperative Group
Article

Abstract

Purpose

To develop a social health measurement framework, to test items in diverse populations and to develop item response theory (IRT) item banks.

Methods

A literature review guided framework development of Social Function and Social Relationships sub-domains. Items were revised based on patient feedback, and Social Function items were field-tested. Analyses included exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), two-parameter IRT modeling and evaluation of differential item functioning (DIF).

Results

The analytic sample included 956 general population respondents who answered 56 Ability to Participate and 56 Satisfaction with Participation items. EFA and CFA identified three Ability to Participate sub-domains. However, because of positive and negative wording, and content redundancy, many items did not fit the IRT model, so item banks do not yet exist. EFA, CFA and IRT identified two preliminary Satisfaction item banks. One item exhibited trivial age DIF.

Conclusion

After extensive item preparation and review, EFA-, CFA- and IRT-guided item banks help provide increased measurement precision and flexibility. Two Satisfaction short forms are available for use in research and clinical practice. This initial validation study resulted in revised item pools that are currently undergoing testing in new clinical samples and populations.

Keywords

Patient-reported outcomes Social health Social function Social relationships Item banks 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Roadmap initiative to develop a computerized system measuring patient-reported outcomes in respondents with a wide range of chronic diseases and demographic characteristics. PROMIS was funded by cooperative agreements to a Statistical Coordinating Center (Northwestern University, PI: David Cella, PhD, U01AR52177) and six Primary Research Sites (Duke University, PI: Kevin Weinfurt, PhD, U01AR52186; University of North Carolina, PI: Darren DeWalt, MD, MPH, U01AR52181; University of Pittsburgh, PI: Paul A. Pilkonis, PhD, U01AR52155; Stanford University, PI: James Fries, MD, U01AR52158; Stony Brook University, PI: Arthur Stone, PhD, U01AR52170; and University of Washington, PI: Dagmar Amtmann, PhD, U01AR52171). NIH Science Officers on this project have included Deborah Ader, PhD, Susan Czajkowski, PhD, Lawrence Fine, MD, DrPH, Laura Lee Johnson, PhD, Louis Quatrano, PhD, Bryce Reeve, PhD, William Riley, PhD, Susana Serrate-Sztein, PhD, and James Witter, MD, PhD. This manuscript was reviewed by the PROMIS Publications Subcommittee prior to external peer review. The authors thank Ron Hays, PhD, and Paul Pilkonis, PhD, for helpful suggestions on the final version of the manuscript, and Jacquelyn George for assistance with research coordination. See the web site at www.nihpromis.org for additional information on the PROMIS cooperative group. Presented in part at the International Symposium on Measurement of Participation in Rehabilitation Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, October 14–15, 2008.

References

  1. 1.
    Cella, D., & Chang, C. H. (2000). A discussion of item response theory (IRT) and its applications in health status assessment. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), 1166–1172.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hays, R. D., Morales, L. S., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl II), 28–42.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bode, R. K., Lai, J. S., Cella, D., & Heinemann, A. W. (2003). Issues in the development of an item bank. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84(4 Suppl 2), S52–S60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Bode, R. K., Gershon, R., & Lai, J. S. (2006). Item banks and their potential applications to health status assessment in diverse populations. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S189–S197.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., et al. (2007). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S3–S11.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    World Health Organization. (1946). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    House, J. S., & Kahn, R. L. (1985). Measures and concepts of social support. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 83–108). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haines, V. A., & Hurlbert, J. S. (1992). Network range and health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33(3), 254–266.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berkman, L., Glass, T., Berkman, L., & Kawachi, I. (2000). Social integration, social methods, social support, and health. In L. Berkman & I. Kawachi (Eds.), Social epidemiology (pp. 137–173). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weissman, M. M., & Bothwell, S. (1976). Assessment of social adjustment by patient self-report. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33(9), 1111–1115.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henderson, S., Duncan-Jones, P., Byrne, D. G., & Scott, R. (1980). Measuring social relationships. The interview schedule for social interaction. Psychological Medicine, 10(4), 723–734.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Birchwood, M., Smith, J., Cochrane, R., Wetton, S., & Copestake, S. (1990). The social functioning scale. The development and validation of a new scale of social adjustment for use in family intervention programmes with schizophrenic patients. British Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 853–859.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eisen, S. V., Normand, S. L. T., Belanger, A. J., Gevorkian, S., & Irvin, E. A. (1994). BASIS-32 and the revised behavioral symptom identification scale (BASIS-R). In M. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcome assessment (3rd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 759–790). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dijkers, M. P., Whiteneck, G., & El Jaroudi, R. (2000). Measures of social outcomes in disability research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 81(12 Suppl 2), S63–S80.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    World Health Organization (2001, 2001/11/27/). World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II) Retrieved 2005/03/15/, from http://www.who.int/lcidh/whodas/index.html.
  16. 16.
    Brekke, J. S., Long, J. D., & Kay, D. D. (2002). The structure and invariance of a model of social functioning in schizophrenia. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 190(2), 63–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., Baer, B. A., Ureno, G., & Villasenor, V. S. (1988). Inventory of interpersonal problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 885–892.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wills, T. A. (1985). Supportive functions of interpersonal relationships. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 61–82). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Bode, R. K., & Hanrahan, R. T. (2010). Measuring social well-being in people with chronic illness. Social Indicators Research, 96, 381–401.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., & Stone, A. A. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S12–S21.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Castel, L. D., Williams, K. A., Bosworth, H. B., Eisen, S. V., Hahn, E. A., Irwin, D. E., et al. (2008). Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: A qualitative analysis of focus-group data. Quality of Life Research, 17(5), 737–749.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A. A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B. B., Yount, S., et al. (2009). Initial item banks and first wave testing of the patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) network: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (in press).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K., & Cella, D. (2009). Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 873–880.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ware, J. E., Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brucker, P. S., Yost, K., Cashy, J., Webster, K., & Cella, D. (2005). General population and cancer patient norms for the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general (FACT-G). Evaluation & The Health Professions, 28(2), 192–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Muthen, B. O., du Toit, S. H. C., Spisic, D. (1987). Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equations in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes Retrieved 2007/01/08/, from http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/muthen/articles/Article_075.pdf.
  28. 28.
    Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2006). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gibbons, R., & Hedeker, D. (1992). Full-information item bi-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 57(3), 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McDonald, R. P. (1981). The dimensionality of test and items. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100–117.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, No. 17.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG user’s guide. Multiple, categorical item analysis and test scoring using item response theory. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    van der Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 50–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further examination of the performance of S-X2, an item fit index for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thissen, D. (2003). IRTLRDIF-Software for the computation of the statistics involved in item response theory likelihood-ratio test for differential item functioning (Version 2.0b).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Garcia, S. F., Cella, D., Clauser, S. B., Flynn, K. E., Lai, J. S., Reeve, B. B., et al. (2007). Standardizing patient-reported outcomes assessment in cancer clinical trials: a patient-reported outcomes measurement information system initiative. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25(32), 5106–5112.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth A. Hahn
    • 1
  • Robert F. DeVellis
    • 2
  • Rita K. Bode
    • 3
  • Sofia F. Garcia
    • 1
  • Liana D. Castel
    • 4
  • Susan V. Eisen
    • 5
  • Hayden B. Bosworth
    • 6
  • Allen W. Heinemann
    • 3
  • Nan Rothrock
    • 1
  • David Cella
    • 1
  • on behalf of the PROMIS Cooperative Group
  1. 1.Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public HealthUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  4. 4.Institute for Medicine and Public Health and Vanderbilt Epidemiology CenterVanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleUSA
  5. 5.Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health and Center for Health Quality, Outcomes & Economic ResearchENRM Veterans HospitalBedfordUSA
  6. 6.Center for Health Services Research, Durham VAMC; Departments of Medicine, Psychiatry, and NursingDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations