PROMIS® Parent Proxy Report Scales: an item response theory analysis of the parent proxy report item banks
- 639 Downloads
The objective of the present study is to describe the item response theory (IRT) analysis of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) pediatric parent proxy-report item banks and the measurement properties of the new PROMIS® Parent Proxy Report Scales for ages 8–17 years.
Parent proxy-report items were written to parallel the pediatric self-report items. Test forms containing the items were completed by 1,548 parent–child pairs. CCFA and IRT analyses of scale dimensionality and item local dependence, and IRT analyses of differential item functioning were conducted.
Parent proxy-report item banks were developed and IRT parameters are provided. The recommended unidimensional short forms for the PROMIS® Parent Proxy Report Scales are item sets that are subsets of the pediatric self-report short forms, setting aside items for which parent responses exhibit local dependence. Parent proxy-report demonstrated moderate to low agreement with pediatric self-report.
The study provides initial calibrations of the PROMIS® parent proxy-report item banks and the creation of the PROMIS® Parent Proxy-Report Scales. It is anticipated that these new scales will have application for pediatric populations in which pediatric self-report is not feasible.
KeywordsPROMIS® Parent proxy report Item response theory
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System
Food and drug administration
Health-related quality of life
National Institute of Health
- 2.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-report outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(Suppl 1), S22–S31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.DeWitt, E. M., Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., Irwin, D. E., Langer, M., Varni, J. W., Lai, J. S., Yeatts, K. B., & DeWalt, D. A. (2011). Construction of the eight-item patient-reported outcomes measurement information system pediatric physical function scales: built using item response theory. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(7), 794–804.Google Scholar
- 11.Varni, J. W., Katz, E. R., Seid, M., Quiggins, D. J. L., Friedman-Bender, A., & Castro, C. M. (1998). The pediatric cancer quality of life inventory (PCQL): I Instrument development, descriptive statistics, and cross-informant variance. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 21, 179–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Varni, J. W., Limbers, C. A., & Burwinkle, T. M. (2007). Parent proxy-report of their children’s health-related quality of life: An analysis of 13, 878 parents’ reliability and validity across age subgroups using the PedsQL™ 4.0 Generic Core Scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5(2), 1–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Varni, J. W., Burwinkle, T. M., & Lane, M. M. (2005). Health-related quality of life measurement in pediatric clinical practice: An appraisal and precept for future research and application. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3(34), 1–9.Google Scholar
- 19.Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 20.Irwin, D. E., Gross, H. E., Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., DeWitt, E. M., Lai, J. S., Amtmann, D., Khastou, L., Varni, J. W., & DeWalt, D. A. (2011). Development of the PROMIS® pediatrics proxy-report item banks. Manuscript under review.Google Scholar
- 21.Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide [Computer Software] (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- 23.Cai, L., du Toit, S. H. C., & Thissen, D. (in press). IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
- 24.Chen, W. H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265–289.Google Scholar
- 25.Lord, F. M. (1977). A study of item bias using item characteristic curve theory. In Y. H. Portinga (Ed.), Basic problems in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 19–29). Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinge.Google Scholar
- 27.Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 57, 289–300.Google Scholar
- 30.Thissen, D., Nelson, L., Rosa, K., & McLeod, L. D. (2001). Item response theory for items scored in more than two categories. In D. Thissen & H. Wainer (Eds.), Test scoring (pp. 141–186). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar