Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement properties and interpretability of the PROMIS item banks in stroke patients: a systematic review

  • Review
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Both the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement and the National Institutes of Health recommend the use of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures in clinical care and research for stroke patients. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the measurement properties and interpretability of PROMIS measures in stroke patients.

Methods

Nine databases were searched from January 1st, 2007 till April 12th, 2021 for studies concerning the measurement properties and interpretability of PROMIS measures in stroke patients. The findings of these studies were analyzed according to the COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline for systematic reviews of Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).

Results

Ten studies were included. The PROMIS Global Health was studied the most: its two subscales had sufficient structural validity in one study of very good quality, sufficient construct validity with > 75% of hypotheses tested confirmed (high GRADE rating), sufficient internal consistency, i.e. α ≥ 0.70 in two studies (high GRADE rating), sufficient reliability, i.e. ICC ≥ 0.70 in one study of doubtful quality, and indeterminate responsiveness in one study of inadequate quality. For other PROMIS measures, the measurement properties and interpretability were limitedly studied.

Conclusion

The PROMIS Global Health showed sufficient structural and construct validity and internal consistency in stroke patients. There is a need for further research on content validity, structural validity, and measurement invariance of PROMIS measures in stroke patients.

Trial Registration Information: CRD42020203044 (PROSPERO).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. PROMIS measures assess physical, mental, and social aspects of health and are available both as computer-adaptive tests (CAT) and as traditional “paper and pencil” instruments (called short forms or scales). Raw scores of each PROMIS measure are converted to an item response theory (IRT)-based T score. A T score of 50 is the average for the USA general population with a standard deviation (SD) of 10.4 PROMIS short forms and scales are freely available in different languages at the PROMIS website (www.healthmeasures.net).

References

  1. Reeves, M., Lisabeth, L., Williams, L., Katzan, I., Kapral, M., Deutsch, A., & Prvu-Bettger, J. (2018). Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for acute stroke: Rationale. Methods and Future Directions. Stroke., 49(6), 1549–1556. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018912

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mokkink, L. B., Prinsen, C. A., Bouter, L. M., Vet, H. C., & Terwee, C. B. (2016). The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 20(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0143

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Salinas, J., Sprinkhuizen, S. M., Ackerson, T., Bernhardt, J., Davie, C., George, M. G., Gething, S., Kelly, A. G., Lindsay, P., Liu, L., Martins, S. C., Morgan, L., Norrving, B., Ribbers, G. M., Silver, F. L., Smith, E. E., Williams, L. S., & Schwamm, L. H. (2016). An international standard set of patient-centered outcome measures after stroke. Stroke, 47(1), 180–186. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., Ader, D., Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., Rose, M., PROMIS Cooperative Group. (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–S11. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Arwert, H., Oosterveer, D. M., Schoones, J. W., Terwee, C. G., & Vliet Vlieland, T. P. M. A systematic review on the current use of PROMIS item banks as outcome measurement in stroke patients. Archives of Rehabilitation Research & Clinical Translation. In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2022.100191.

  6. Prinsen, C. A. C., Mokkink, L. B., Bouter, L. M., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., de Vet, H. C. W., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Quality of Life Research, 27, 1147–1157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Mokkink, L. B., de Vet, H. C. W., Prinsen, C. A. C., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Quality of Life Research, 27, 1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schünemann, H., Brożek, J., Guyatt, G., Oxman, A. (2013). GRADE handbook—Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Updated in 2013. Retrieved from: https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html

  9. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2010). The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Terwee, C. B., Prinsen, C. A. C., Chiarotto, A., Westerman, M. J., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., de Vet, H. C. W., & Mokkink, L. B. (2018). COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: A Delphi study. Quality of Life Research, 27(5), 1159–1170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lapin, B., Thompson, N. R., Schuster, A., & Katzan, I. L. (2019). Clinical utility of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement information system domain scales. Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 12(1), e004753. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.004753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Katzan, I. L., Fan, Y., Uchino, K., & Griffith, S. D. (2016). The PROMIS physical function scale: A promising scale for use in patients with ischemic stroke. Neurology, 86(19), 1801–1807. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000002652

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Katzan, I. L., Thompson, N. R., Lapin, B., & Uchino, K. (2017). Added value of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in stroke clinical practice. Journal of the American Heart Association, 6(7), e005356. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.116.005356

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Lam, K. H., & Kwa, V. I. H. (2018). Validity of the PROMIS-10 Global Health assessed by telephone and on paper in minor stroke and transient ischaemic attack in the Netherlands. British Medical Journal Open, 8(7), e019919. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Katzan, I. L., & Lapin, B. (2018). PROMIS GH (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health) scale in stroke: A validation study. Stroke, 49(1), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen, C. X., Kroenke, K., Stump, T., Kean, J., Krebs, E. E., Bair, M. J., Damush, T., & Monahan, P. O. (2019). Comparative responsiveness of the PROMIS pain interference short forms with legacy pain measures: Results from three randomized clinical trials. The Journal of Pain, 20(6), 664–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2018.11.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chen, C. X., Kroenke, K., Stump, T. E., Kean, J., Carpenter, J. S., Krebs, E. E., Bair, M. J., Damush, T. M., & Monahan, P. O. (2018). Estimating minimally important differences for the PROMIS pain interference scales: Results from 3 randomized clinical trials. Pain, 159(4), 775–782. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001121

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kroenke, K., Stump, T. E., Chen, C. X., Kean, J., Bair, M. J., Damush, T. M., Krebs, E. E., & Monahan, P. O. (2020). Minimally important differences and severity thresholds are estimated for the PROMIS depression scales from three randomized clinical trials. Journal of Affective Disorders, 266, 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.101

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Kroenke, K., Stump, T. E., Chen, C. X., Kean, J., Damush, T. M., Bair, M. J., Krebs, E. E., & Monahan, P. O. (2021). Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) depression scales in three clinical trials. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01674-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. de Graaf, J. A., Visser-Meily, J. M., Schepers, V. P., Baars, A., Kappelle, L. J., Passier, P. E., Wermer, M. J., de Wit, D. C., & Post, M. W. (2021). Comparison between EQ-5D-5L and PROMIS-10 to evaluate health-related quality of life 3 months after stroke: A cross-sectional multicenter study. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 57(3), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06335-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K. L., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9496-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Pellicciari, L., Chiarotto, A., Giusti, E., Crins, M. H. P., Roorda, L. D., & Terwee, C. B. (2021). Psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scale v1.2: Global Health (PROMIS-GH) in a Dutch general population. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 226. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01855-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Alcantara, J., Whetten, A., Zabriskie, C., & Jones, S. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis of PROMIS-29 V1.0, PROMIS Global Health and the RAND SF-36 from chiropractic responders attending care in a practice-based research network. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 82. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01725-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Cameron, L. J., Wales, K., Casey, A., Pike, S., Jolliffe, L., Schneider, E. J., Christie, L. J., Ratcliffe, J., & Lannin, N. A. (2021). Self-reported quality of life following stroke: A systematic review of instruments with a focus on their psychometric properties. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02944-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Abma, I. L., Butje, B. J. D., Ten Klooster, P. M., & van der Wees, P. J. (2021). Measurement properties of the Dutch-Flemish Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function item bank and instruments: A systematic review. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01647-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Terwee, C. B., Peipert, J. D., Chapman, R., Lai, J. S., Terluin, B., Cella, D., Griffith, P., & Mokkink, L. B. (2021). Minimal important change (MIC): A conceptual clarification and systematic review of MIC estimates of PROMIS measures. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02925-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Kuijlaars, I. A. R., Teela, L., van Vulpen, L. F. D., Timmer, M. A., Coppens, M., Gouw, S. C., Peters, M., Kruip, M. J. H. A., Cnossen, M. H., Muis, J. J., van Hoorn, E. S., Haverman, L., & Fischer, K. (2021). Generic PROMIS item banks in adults with hemophilia for patient-reported outcome assessment: Feasibility, measurement properties, and relevance. Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 5(8), e12621. https://doi.org/10.1002/rth2.12621

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Basalt Rehabilitation, Wassenaarseweg 501, 2333 AL, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Daniëlla M. Oosterveer, Henk Arwert & Thea P. M. Vliet Vlieland

  2. Department of Rehabilitation, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Henk Arwert

  3. Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Center Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Caroline B. Terwee

  4. Methology, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Caroline B. Terwee

  5. Directorate of Research Policy (Formerly: Walaeus Library), Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Jan W. Schoones

  6. Department of Orthopaedics, Rehabilitation and Physical Therapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Thea P. M. Vliet Vlieland

Authors
  1. Daniëlla M. Oosterveer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henk Arwert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Caroline B. Terwee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan W. Schoones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thea P. M. Vliet Vlieland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniëlla M. Oosterveer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oosterveer, D.M., Arwert, H., Terwee, C.B. et al. Measurement properties and interpretability of the PROMIS item banks in stroke patients: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 31, 3305–3315 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-022-03149-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-022-03149-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation