ArticleArthritis research & therapy2017
Varying the item format improved the range of measurement in patient-reported outcome measures assessing physical function.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- A direct comparison of the measurement properties of the PROMIS-16 and EQ-5D-5L in the U.S. general population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Bridging patient-reported outcomes and performance assessments in older adults: linking the Short Physical Performance Battery to the standardised PROMIS Physical Function scale.Age and ageing · 2026Article
- Reference values for the PROMISBMC public health · 2025Article
- Comparing Approaches to Link SF-36 PF-10 Scores to PROMIS Physical Function: A Validation Study in Three Clinical Samples.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Converting PROMISHealth and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- The Patient Activation Measure-13 (PAM-13) in an oncology patient population: psychometric properties and dimensionality evaluation.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- Physical performance tasks were linked to the PROMIS physical function metric in patients undergoing hemodialysis.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the PROMIS Preference score (PROPr) in patients with rheumatological and psychosomatic conditions.BMC rheumatology · 2022Article
- The 8-foot up and go test is the best way to assess physical function in the rheumatoid arthritis clinic.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2018Article
- Literature review to characterize the empirical basis for response scale selection in pediatric populations.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhysical function (PF) is a core patient-reported outcome domain in clinical trials in rheumatic diseases. Frequently used PF measures have ceiling effects, leading to large sample size requirements and low sensitivity to change. In most of these instruments, the response category that indicates the highest PF level is the statement that one is able to perform a given physical activity without any limitations or difficulty. This study investigates whether using an item format with an extended response scale, allowing respondents to state that the performance of an activity is easy or very easy, increases the range of precise measurement of self-reported PF.
methodsThree five-item PF short forms were constructed from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) wave 1 data. All forms included the same physical activities but varied in item stem and response scale: format A ("Are you able to …"; "without any difficulty"/"unable to do"); format B ("Does your health now limit you …"; "not at all"/"cannot do"); format C ("How difficult is it for you to …"; "very easy"/"impossible"). Each short-form item was answered by 2217-2835 subjects. We evaluated unidimensionality and estimated a graded response model for the 15 short-form items and remaining 119 items of the PROMIS PF bank to compare item and test information for the short forms along the PF continuum. We then used simulated data for five groups with different PF levels to illustrate differences in scoring precision between the short forms using different item formats.
resultsSufficient unidimensionality of all short-form items and the original PF item bank was supported. Compared to formats A and B, format C increased the range of reliable measurement by about 0.5 standard deviations on the positive side of the PF continuum of the sample, provided more item information, and was more useful in distinguishing known groups with above-average functioning.
conclusionsUsing an item format with an extended response scale is an efficient option to increase the measurement range of self-reported physical function without changing the content of the measure or affecting the latent construct of the instrument.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.