Amsterdam Rehabilitation Research Center | Reade, Dr. Jan van Breemenstraat, Postbus 58271, 1040 HG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Qual Life Res. 2019 May;28(5):1231-1243. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-2087-x. Epub 2019 Jan 2.
To investigate the validity of comparisons across patients with different musculoskeletal disorders and persons from the general population by evaluating differential item functioning (DIF) for the PROMIS physical function (PROMIS-PF), pain interference (PROMIS-PI), and pain behavior (PROMIS-PB) item banks.
Patients with chronic pain, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), or osteoarthritis (OA); patients receiving physiotherapy (PT); and persons from the Dutch general population completed the full Dutch-Flemish PROMIS-PF (121-items), PROMIS-PI (40-items), or PROMIS-PB (39-items) banks. DIF was assessed with ordinal logistic regression models and McFadden's pseudo R-change of ≥ 2% as critical value. The impact of DIF on item scores and the T-scores per bank was examined by inspecting item characteristic curves (ICCs) and test characteristic curves (TCCs).
2762 patients with chronic pain, 2029 with RA, 1247 with OA, 805 receiving PT, and 1310 healthy persons participated. For the PROMIS-PF, 25 out of 121 items were flagged for DIF, of which 10 items were flagged in multiple comparisons. For the PROMIS-PI, only 2 out of 40 items were flagged for DIF and for the PROMIS-PB, only 3 out of 39 items. Most DIF items had R values just above the critical value of 2% and all showed uniform DIF. The ICCs and TCCs showed that the magnitude and impact of DIF on the item and T-scores were negligible.
This study supports the universal applicability of PROMIS across (patient) populations. Comparisons across patients with different musculoskeletal disorders and persons from the general population are valid, when applying the PROMIS-PF, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-PB banks.
通过评估 PROMIS 身体机能(PROMIS-PF)、疼痛干扰(PROMIS-PI)和疼痛行为(PROMIS-PB)项目库的差异项目功能(DIF),研究不同肌肉骨骼疾病患者和一般人群个体之间比较的有效性。
慢性疼痛、类风湿关节炎(RA)或骨关节炎(OA)患者;接受物理治疗(PT)的患者;以及荷兰一般人群的个体完成了全荷兰-佛兰德斯 PROMIS-PF(121 项)、PROMIS-PI(40 项)或 PROMIS-PB(39 项)库。使用有序逻辑回归模型评估 DIF,并将≥2%的麦克法登伪 R 变化作为临界值。通过检查项目特征曲线(ICC)和测试特征曲线(TCC),检查 DIF 对项目得分和每个库的 T 评分的影响。
2762 名慢性疼痛患者、2029 名 RA 患者、1247 名 OA 患者、805 名接受 PT 的患者和 1310 名健康个体参与了研究。对于 PROMIS-PF,121 项中有 25 项被标记为 DIF,其中 10 项在多项比较中被标记。对于 PROMIS-PI,只有 40 项中的 2 项被标记为 DIF,对于 PROMIS-PB,只有 39 项中的 3 项被标记为 DIF。大多数 DIF 项目的 R 值略高于 2%的临界值,并且都表现出一致的 DIF。ICC 和 TCC 表明,DIF 对项目和 T 评分的大小和影响可以忽略不计。
这项研究支持 PROMIS 在(患者)人群中的普遍适用性。当应用 PROMIS-PF、PROMIS-PI 和 PROMIS-PB 库时,不同肌肉骨骼疾病患者和一般人群个体之间的比较是有效的。