Dataset Information

Computing PROPr Utility Scores for PROMIS® Profile Instruments.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS) Profile instruments measure health status on 8 PROMIS domains. The PROMIS-Preference (PROPr) score provides a preference-based summary score for health states defined by 7 PROMIS domains. The Profile and PROPr share 6 domains; PROPr has 1 unique domain (Cognitive Function-Abilities), and the Profile has 2 unique domains (Anxiety and Pain Intensity). We produce an equation for calculating PROPr utility scores with Profile data.

Methods

We used data from 3982 members of US online survey panels who have scores on all 9 PROMIS domains. We used a 70%/30% split for model fit/validation. Using root-mean-square error and mean error on the utility scale, we compared models for predicting the missing Cognitive Function score via (A) the population average; (B) a score representing excellent cognitive function; (C) a score representing poor cognitive function; (D) a score predicted from linear regression of the 8 profile domains; and (E) a score predicted from a Bayesian neural network of the 8 profile domains.

Results

The mean errors in the validation sample on the PROPr scale (which ranges from -0.022 to 1.00) for the models were: (A) 0.025, (B) 0.067, (C) -0.23, (D) 0.018, and (E) 0.018. The root-mean-square errors were: (A) 0.097, (B) 0.12, (C) 0.29, (D) 0.095, and (E) 0.094.

Conclusion

Although the Bayesian neural network had the best root-mean-square error for producing PROPr utility scores from Profile instruments, linear regression performs almost as well and is easier to use. We recommend the linear model for producing PROPr utility scores for PROMIS Profiles.

SUBMITTER: Dewitt B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7269185 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Computing PROPr Utility Scores for PROMIS® Profile Instruments.

Dewitt Barry B Jalal Hawre H Hanmer Janel J

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 20191230 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS) Profile instruments measure health status on 8 PROMIS domains. The PROMIS-Preference (PROPr) score provides a preference-based summary score for health states defined by 7 PROMIS domains. The Profile and PROPr share 6 domains; PROPr has 1 unique domain (Cognitive Function-Abilities), and the Profile has 2 unique domains (Anxiety and Pain Intensity). We produce an equation for calculating PROPr utility score ...[more]

PMID: 32197733

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Bringing together generic and heart failure (HF)-specific items in a publicly available, patient-reported outcome measure may facilitate routine health status assessment for improving clinical care and shared decision-making, assessing quality of care, evaluating new interventions, and comparing groups with different conditions. Methods and Results We performed a mixed-methods study to develop and validate the PROMIS®-Plus-HF (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System®-Plus-Heart Failure) profile measure-a HF-specific instrument based on the generic PROMIS. We conducted 8 focus groups with 61 patients with HF and phone interviews with 10 HF clinicians. The measure was developed via an iterative process of reviewing existing PROMIS items and developing and testing new HF items. In a 600-patient sample, we estimated reliability (internal consistency; test-retest, with n=100 participants). We conducted validity analyses using Pearson r and Spearman ? correlations with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire subscores. In a longitudinal sample, we performed responsiveness testing (paired t tests) with 75 patients with HF receiving interventions with expected health status improvement. The PROMIS-Plus-HF measure comprises 86 items (64 existing; 22 new) across 18 domains. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach ?) coefficients ranged from 0.52 to 0.96, with ??0.70 in 12 of 17 domains. Test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients were ?0.90. Correlations with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire subscores supported expected convergent ( r/?>0.60) and divergent validity ( r/?<0.30). In the longitudinal sample, 10 of 18 domains had improved ( P<0.05) scores from baseline to follow-up. Conclusions The PROMIS-Plus-HF profile measure-a complete assessment of physical, mental, and social health-exhibited good psychometric characteristics and may facilitate patient-centered care and research. Subsets of domains and items can be used depending on the clinical or research purpose.

Project description:BackgroundGlobal health measures represent an attractive option for researchers and clinicians seeking a brief snapshot of a patient's overall perspective on his or her health. Because scores on different global health measures are not comparable, comparative effectiveness research (CER) is challenging.ObjectiveTo establish a common reporting metric so that the physical and mental health scores on the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12 (©) ) can be converted into scores on the corresponding Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) Global Health scores.DesignFollowing a single-sample linking design, participants from an Internet panel completed items from the PROMIS Global Health and VR-12 Health Survey. A common metric was created using analyses based on item response theory (IRT), producing score cross-walk tables for the mental and physical health components of each measure. The linking relationships were evaluated by calculating the standard deviation of differences between the observed and linked PROMIS scores and estimating confidence intervals by sample size.ParticipantsParticipants (N?=?2025) were 49 % male and 73 % white; mean age was 46 years.Main measuresMental and physical health subscales of the PROMIS Global Health and the VR-12. The mean VR-12 physical component and mental component scores were 45.2 and 46.6, respectively; the mean PROMIS physical and mental health scores were 48.3 and 48.5, respectively.Key resultsWe found evidence that the combined set of VR-12 and PROMIS items were relatively unidimensional and that we could proceed with linking. Linking worked better between the physical health than mental health scores using VR-12 item responses (vs. linking based on algorithmic scores). For each of the cross-walks, users can minimize the impact of linking error with modest increases in sample sizes.ConclusionsVR-12 scores can be expressed on the PROMIS Global Health metric to facilitate the evaluation of treatment, including CER. Extending these results to other common measures of global health is encouraged.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global-10 was recently developed to assess physical and mental health and provide an estimated EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score. This instrument needs to be validated for specific patient cohorts such as those with rotator cuff pathology. HYPOTHESIS:There is moderate to high correlation between the PROMIS Global-10 and legacy patient-reported outcome measures; PROMIS Global-10 will not show ceiling effects; and estimated EQ-5D scores will show good correlation and low variance with actual EQ-5D scores. STUDY DESIGN:Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS:A total of 323 patients with rotator cuff disease were prospectively enrolled before treatment. Each patient completed the PROMIS Global-10, EQ-5D, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder assessment form, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and those with known rotator cuff tears completed the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC). Spearman correlations were calculated. Bland-Altman agreement tests were conducted between estimated EQ-5D scores from the PROMIS and actual EQ-5D scores. Ceiling and floor effects were assessed, defined as ?15% respondents with highest or lowest possible score. RESULTS:Correlation between the PROMIS Global-10 and EQ-5D was excellent (0.70, P < .0001). Correlation of the PROMIS physical scores was excellent-good with the ASES (0.62, P < .0001), good with the WORC (0.47, P < .0001), and good with the SANE (0.41, P < .0005). Correlation between the PROMIS mental scores was poor with the ASES (0.34, P < .0001), the WORC (0.32, P = .0016), and the SANE (0.24, P < .0001). No floor or ceiling effects were found. Agreement analysis showed substantial variance in individual scores, despite the overall similarity in mean scores between the estimated and actual EQ-5D scores, indicating poor agreement. Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement for estimated EQ-5D scores ranged from 34% below to 31% above actual EQ-5D scores. CONCLUSION:Physical function scores of the PROMIS Global-10 show high correlation with legacy patient-reported outcome instruments, suggesting that it is a reliable tool for outcome assessment in a population with rotator cuff pathology. The large variability in 95% limit of agreement suggested that the estimated EQ-5D scores from the PROMIS Global-10 cannot replace traditional EQ-5D scores.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Children with JIA may experience difficulty with health related quality of life (HRQOL). The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) a patient related outcome (PRO) measure, covers HRQOL domains that include physical function, mental health, and social interactions. During initial use, we found PROMIS identified children with symptoms of depression, sometimes before they shared those feelings with parents or members of the clinic team. We studied the use of PROMIS for this purpose, and to determine what demographic, clinical, and other characteristics might be related to higher depressive symptom scores. METHODS:From March 2014 - February 2017, at each visit, all JIA patients having met ILAR classification criteria seen by M.L.M. received the PROMIS Short Form 35 v.1.0, as part of routine care. T scores were calculated from raw scores for mobility, anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, peer relationships, and pain interference domains. Data extracted by optical mark recognition software were merged with electronic medical record (EMR data), extracted by Extract/Transform/Load software, including joint counts, visit age, ANA, RF, and HLA-B27 status. Mixed effects models were used to identify significant associations of independent variables with depression T scores. RESULTS:Data from 148 patients were analyzed (114 females for 435 visits, 34 males for 118 visits; 13.8?±?2.8?years): 70 persistent oligoarthritis, 9 extended oligoarthritis, 19 ERA, 21 polyarthritis (RF-), 5 polyarthritis (RF+), 11 undifferentiated arthritis, 3 psoriatic arthritis, 10 systemic arthritis). T scores showed wide ranges within individual JIA categories, with similar mean scores for all groups. Univariate linear mixed effects models showed significant relationships to depression T scores of gender and race (males and Asian patients with lower T scores, p?<?.0001, p?=?0.091, respectively), joint count (p?=?0.002), pain interference score (p?=?0.0004), and Patient and Physician Global Assessment (p?=?0.004, p?<?.0001, respectively). No particular JIA category was associated with Depression T scores. HRQOL domains were interrelated (p?<?.0001), including patients reporting symptoms of depression tending also to report symptoms of anxiety. PROMIS identified 15 patients who did not otherwise report depressive symptoms, but needed referral for counseling; eight did not endorse depressive symptoms until the 2nd or 3rd visit. Only 3 patients had disease flare. Concerns besides arthritis such as parental conflict or school bullying were elicited in 7 patients during interviews with the social worker. All patients expressed being worried about their arthritis. CONCLUSION:PROMIS is useful in screening JIA patients for symptoms of depression, particularly to identify patients who might not otherwise report these symptoms. The other PROMIS domain scores are related to reporting of symptoms of depression, as is Patient and Physician Global Assessment. Future studies will use PROMIS questionnaires incorporated into the EMR, permitting data entry by tablets and an online patient portal. This will make possible comparisons of HRQOL in children with JIA to those with other chronic rheumatic and non-rheumatic diseases.

Dataset Information

Computing PROPr Utility Scores for PROMIS® Profile Instruments.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Computing PROPr Utility Scores for PROMIS® Profile Instruments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure