Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance of the PROMIS Physical Function 8b—Adult Short Form v2.0

Quality of Life Research volume 29, pages 3397–3406 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

The National Institutes of Health established the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to assess health across various chronic illnesses. The standardized PROMIS measures have been used to assess symptoms in studies that included Native American participants, although the psychometric properties of these measures have not been assessed among a solely Native American population. This study aimed to assess the reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance of a widely used PROMIS Physical Function survey among Native Americans residing on or near the Apsáalooke (Crow) Reservation who were living with chronic illnesses.

Methods

Participants aged 24 to 82 years and living with at least one chronic illness were recruited for a community-based participatory research project. Baseline data were used for the current study (N = 210). The 8-item PROMIS Physical Function 8b—Adult Short Form v2.0 was used to assess the function of upper and lower extremities, central core regions, and the ability to complete daily activities on a 5-point Likert scale.

Results

Results indicated that the above PROMIS survey had high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.95) and split-half (r = 0.92, p < 0.001) reliabilities. Confirmatory factor analyses supported construct validity among females of the above population and when the two sex groups were combined. Results also indicated that corresponding thresholds and factor loadings were invariant across male and female groups.

Conclusions

The above PROMIS measure had good psychometric properties in females and when the two sex groups were combined among Native American adults living on or near the Apsáalooke reservation with chronic illnesses. Thresholds and factor loadings appeared to be invariant by sex. Future studies with a larger sample size among males and more studies on the psychometric properties of other PROMIS measures among Native American populations are needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

39,95 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)

References

  1. Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., & Cella, D. (2005). The promise of PROMIS: using item response theory to improve assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 23(5 Suppl 39), S53–S57.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Black, N. (2013). Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ British Medical Journal, 346, f167. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boyce, M. B., Browne, J. P., & Greenhalgh, J. (2014). The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: A systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ Quality & Safety, 23(6), 508–518. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gershon, R., Rothrock, N. E., Hanrahan, R. T., Jansky, L. J., Harniss, M., & Riley, W. (2010). The development of a clinical outcomes survey research application: Assessment Center. Quality of Life Research, 19(5), 677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9634-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., 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), S3. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., & Stone, A. A. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5), S12. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000254567.79743.e.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Klem, M., Saghafi, E., Abromitis, R., Stover, A., Dew, M., & Pilkonis, P. (2009). Building PROMIS item banks: Librarians as co-investigators. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 881–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9498-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Irwin, D. E., Stucky, B., Langer, M. M., Thissen, D., DeWitt, E. M., Lai, J.-S., et al. (2010). An item response analysis of the pediatric PROMIS anxiety and depressive symptoms scales. Quality of Life Research, 19(4), 595–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9619-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1179–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Rose, M., Bjorner, J. B., Becker, J., Fries, J. F., & Ware, J. E. (2008). Evaluation of a preliminary physical function item bank supported the expected advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.06.025.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bajaj, J., Thacker, L., Wade, J., Sanyal, A., Heuman, D., Sterling, R., et al. (2011). PROMIS computerised adaptive tests are dynamic instruments to measure health-related quality of life in patients with cirrhosis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 34(9), 1123–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04842.x.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jensen, R., Potosky, A., Reeve, B., Hahn, E., Cella, D., Fries, J., et al. (2015). Validation of the PROMIS physical function measures in a diverse US population-based cohort of cancer patients. Quality of Life Research, 24(10), 2333–2344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0992-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Quach, C., Langer, M., Chen, R., Thissen, D., Usinger, D., Emerson, M., et al. (2016). Reliability and validity of PROMIS measures administered by telephone interview in a longitudinal localized prostate cancer study. Quality of Life Research, 25(11), 2811–2823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1325-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Hung, M., Clegg, D. O., Greene, T., Weir, C., & Saltzman, C. L. (2012). A lower extremity physical function computerized adaptive testing instrument for orthopaedic patients. Foot & Ankle International, 33(4), 326–335. https://doi.org/10.3113/FAI.2012.0326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bartlett, S. J., Ana-Maria, O., Duncan, T., DeLeon, E., Ruffing, V., Clegg-Smith, K., et al. (2015). Reliability and validity of selected PROMIS measures in people with rheumatoid arthritis. PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0138543. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138543.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Broderick, J. E., Schneider, S., Junghaenel, D. U., Schwartz, J. E., & Stone, A. A. (2013). Validity and reliability of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system instruments in osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care & Research, 65(10), 1625–1633. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Benyshek, D. C. (2001). The political ecology of diabetes among the Havasupai Indians of northern Arizona. Tempe: Arizona State University.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Denny, C. H., Holtzman, D., Goins, R. T., & Croft, J. B. (2005). Disparities in chronic disease risk factors and health status between American Indian/Alaska Native and white elders: Findings from a telephone survey, 2001 and 2002. American Journal of Public Health, 95(5), 825–827. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2004.043489.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Walls, M. L., Sittner, K. J., Aronson, B. D., Forsberg, A. K., Whitbeck, L. B., & Mustafa, A. A. (2017). Stress exposure and physical, mental, and behavioral health among American Indian adults with type 2 diabetes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(9), 1074. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14091074.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Goins, R. T., Innes, K., & Dong, L. (2012). Lower body functioning prevalence and correlates in older American Indians in a southeastern tribe: The Native Elder Care Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60(3), 577–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03869.x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Crow Apsalooke. (2020). Retrieved June 29, 2020, from https://www.visitmt.com/places-to-go/indian-nations/apsaalooke-crow.html.

  22. Medicine Crow, J. (1992). From the heart of the Crow country: The Crow Indians’ Own Stories (1st ed.). London: Orion Books.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hallett, J., Held, S., McCormick, A. K. H. G., Simonds, V., Real Bird, S., Martin, C., et al. (2017). What touched your heart? Collaborative story analysis emerging from an Apsáalooke cultural context. Qualitative Health Research, 27(9), 1267–1277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316669340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. HealthMeasures Scoring Service powered by Assessment CenterSM. (n.d). Retrieved June 29, 2020, from https://www.assessmentcenter.net/ac_scoringservice.

  25. David, C., Gershon, R., Bass, M., & Rothrock, N. (2020). Assessment center scoring servicesm user manual. Retrieved from https://www.assessmentcenter.net/ac_scoringservice/templates/UserManual.pdf.

  26. PROMIS Physical Function Scoring Manual (2019, June 10). Retrieved June 29, 2020, from https://www.healthmeasures.net/images/PROMIS/manuals/PROMIS_Physical_Function_Scoring_Manual.pdf.

  27. Charter, R. A. (2003). A breakdown of reliability coefficients by test type and reliability method, and the clinical implications of low reliability. The Journal of General Psychology, 130(3), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300309601160.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rosseel, Y., Oberski, D., Byrnes, J., Vanbrabant, L., Savalei, V., Merkle, E., Hallquist, M., Rhemtulla, M., Katsikatsou, M., Barendse, M., Chow, M., & Jorgensen, T. (2020, May 13). Package ‘lavaan’. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lavaan/lavaan.pdf.

  29. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Steiger, J. H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 893–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jorgensen, T.D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2018). SemTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-1. Retrieved from https://github.com/simsem/semTools.wiki.git.

  32. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292–1306. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wu, H., & Estabrook, R. (2016). Identification of confirmatory factor analysis models of different levels of invariance for ordered categorical outcomes. Psychometrika, 81(4), 1014–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-016-9506-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Svetina, D., Rutkowski, L., & Rutkowski, D. (2020). Multiple-group invariance with categorical outcomes using updated guidelines: An illustration using M plus and the lavaan/semtools packages. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1602776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bureau of Indian Affairs (2020). Indian entities recognized and eligible to receive services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/30/2020-01707/indian-entities-recognized-by-and-eligible-to-receive-services-from-the-united-states-bureau-of.

  37. George, S., Duran, N., & Norris, K. (2014). A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to minority research participation among African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders. American Journal of Public Health, 104(2), e16–e31. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301706.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Mitchell, T. L., & Baker, E. (2005). Community-building versus career-building research: The challenges, risks, and responsibilities of conducting research with Aboriginal and Native American communities. Journal of Cancer Education, 20(S1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Barun, N. (2010). Understanding the relevance of sample size calculation. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 58(6), 469–470. https://doi.org/10.4103/0301-4738.71673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49(2), 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Mark Schure, Dr. Jillian Inouye, Lucille Other Medicine, Trevor Pollom, and the Messengers for Health Research Team who provided comments on an earlier version of this work.

Funding

This study was funded by National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (Grant No. U01MD010619), National Institute of General Medical Sciences (Grant Nos. U54GM104944, P20GM103474).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Nursing, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA

    Du Feng

  2. Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, USA

    Fimbel Laurel & Suzanne Held

  3. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities/National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Dorothy Castille

  4. Messengers for Health, Crow Agency, Montana, USA

    Alma Knows His Gun McCormick

Authors
  1. Du Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fimbel Laurel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dorothy Castille
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alma Knows His Gun McCormick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Suzanne Held
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Du Feng.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feng, D., Laurel, F., Castille, D. et al. Reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance of the PROMIS Physical Function 8b—Adult Short Form v2.0. Qual Life Res 29, 3397–3406 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02603-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02603-5

Keywords

  • PROMIS measure
  • Physical function
  • Psychometric properties
  • Native American
  • Chronic Illness

Search

Navigation