Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30529442›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pain2019

Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms With Legacy Pain Measures: Results From Three Randomized Clinical Trials.

Chen X Chen, Kurt Kroenke, Timothy Stump, Jacob Kean, Erin E Krebs, Matthew J Bair, Teresa Damush, Patrick O Monahan

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pain, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT01236521 nacompletednot on this map

Care Management for the Effective Use of Opioids (CAMEO)

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2011 to 2015Enrolled261ConditionsLow Back Pain, PainArmsPharmacological (MED), Behavioral treatment (CBT)
NCT01507688 nacompletednot on this map

Stroke Self-Management: Effect on Function and Stroke Quality of Life

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2013 to 2019Enrolled258ConditionsStrokeArmsStroke Self-Management
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Measurement properties and interpretability of the PROMIS item banks in stroke patients: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. The impact of early postoperative pain interference on 2-year outcomes after hip arthroscopy.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Article
  5. Validity of Activity-Based Checks (ABCs) of Pain, A Functional Pain Scale.Pain management nursing : official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

Chen X ChenIndiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana.. Electronic address: cxchen@iu.edu.
Kurt KroenkeIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.; Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indianapolis, Indiana.; VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Health Information and Communication, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Timothy StumpIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Jacob KeanUniversity of Utah School of Medicine Department of Population Health Sciences, Salt Lake City, Utah.; Salt Lake VA Health Care System Decision-Enhancement and Analytic Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Erin E KrebsMinneapolis VA Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Matthew J BairIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.; Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indianapolis, Indiana.; VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Health Information and Communication, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Teresa DamushIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.; Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indianapolis, Indiana.; VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Health Information and Communication, Indianapolis, Indiana.; VA Health Services Research and Development, Precision Monitoring for Quality Improvement (PRIS-M QUERI Center), Indianapolis, Indiana.
Patrick O MonahanIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Funding

Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteUL1TR001108 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$23.3M
INDIANA UNIVERSITY: TRAINING IN BEHAVIORAL NURSINGT32NR007066 · NINR · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI RAWL, SUSAN M · 1990 to 2017
$4.2M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteKL2TR001106 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$3.2M
Responsiveness and Clinical Validity of PROMIS Pain and Depression MeasuresR01AR064081 · NIAMS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI MONAHAN, PATRICK O. · 2012 to 2015
$938k
Measurement-Based Telehealth Care of Mild Traumatic Brain InjuryIK2RX000879 · VA · VA SALT LAKE CITY HEALTHCARE SYSTEM · PI KEAN, JACOB T. · 2012 to 2017
–
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001106NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001108NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR064081NINR NIH HHS T32 NR007066RRD VA IK2 RX000879
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) scales are reliable and publicly accessible; however, little is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical trials and how their responsiveness compares with legacy measures. The study purpose was to evaluate responsiveness for the PROMIS-PI scales and to compare their responsiveness with legacy pain measures. We used data from 3 clinical trials totaling 759 participants. The clinical trials included patients with chronic low back pain (n = 261), chronic back or osteoarthritis pain (n = 240), and a history of stroke (n = 258). At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed PROMIS-PI scales and legacy pain measures (Brief Pain Inventory Interference scale; Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scale; 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain scale; and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). We measured global ratings of pain change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to identify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area under the curve analysis. The PROMIS-PI scales had largely comparable responsiveness with the Brief Pain Inventory Interference and Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scales. The 4 PROMIS-PI short forms had comparable responsiveness. For all pain questionnaires, responsiveness varied based on the study population and whether pain improved or worsened. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents 1) how responsive the PROMIS-PI scales were to detect change over time in the context of 3 clinical trials and 2) how their responsiveness compared with legacy pain measures. The findings can help researchers and clinicians choose between different patient-reported pain outcome measures.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesPain interferencepain measurementpatient-reported outcome measuresPROMISresponsiveness

Identifiers

PMID30529442
PMCPMC6551313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.