Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29974172›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2019

PROMIS: a valid and efficient outcomes instrument for patients with ACL tears.

Kyle John Hancock, Natalie Glass, Chris A Anthony, Brian R Wolf, Carolyn M Hettrich, John Albright, Matt Bollier, Annunziato Amendola

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Preoperative Evaluation of the Lower Extremity-SpecificArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kyle John HancockThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. kyle-hancock@uiowa.edu.
Natalie GlassThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Chris A AnthonyThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Brian R WolfThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Carolyn M HettrichThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
John AlbrightThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Matt BollierThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, 01008 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Annunziato AmendolaDivision of Sports Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe current study compares the Patient Reported Outcomes Information System Physical Function Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS PF CAT) to traditional knee PRO instruments in a healthy population undergoing surgery for ACL injuries with the following objectives: (1) identify and determine the strength of any correlations between the scores of PROMIS PF CAT and current knee PROs or their subscales that measure physical function; (2) evaluate PROMIS PF CAT's test burden; and (3) determine if PROMIS PF CAT has any floor or ceiling effects in this population.

methodsPatients indicated for ACL surgery completed the Short Form-36 Physical Function (SF-36 PF), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Marx Knee Activity Rating Scale (Marx), the EuroQol 5-dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D), and PROMIS PF CAT. Correlations between PROs were defined as follows: High (≥ 0.7); high-moderate (0.61-0.69); moderate (0.4-0.6); moderate-weak (0.31-0.39); and weak (≤ 0.3). Floor or ceiling effects were considered significant if 15% or more patients reported the lowest or highest possible total score, respectively.

results100 patients participated with a mean age of 26 years (range 11-57). The PROMIS PF CAT demonstrated high correlations with SF-36 PF (r = 0.82, p < 0.01), EQ-5D (r = - 0.70, p < 0.01) KOOS ADL (r = 0.74, p < 0.01), and KOOS Sport (r = 0.70, p < 0.01). There were no ceiling or floor effects for PROMIS PF CAT (0%). The mean number of items completed for the PROMIS PF CAT was 4.2 (median 4; range 4-11).

conclusionsThe PROMIS PF CAT shows a high correlation with commonly employed PROs that also measure physical function with low test burden and without ceiling effects in this relatively young and healthy population.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdolescentAdultAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionChildFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultACL outcomesComputer adaptive testingPatient-reported outcomesPROMIS

Identifiers

PMID29974172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.