Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31359210›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2019

State of the psychometric methods: patient-reported outcome measure development and refinement using item response theory.

Angela M Stover, Lori D McLeod, Michelle M Langer, Wen-Hung Chen, Bryce B Reeve

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Psychometric Validation of a Short-Form Spanish Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire (SF-SLVQOL) Using Rasch Analysis: From 25 to 6 Items.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Pharmacist-facilitated Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) monitoring: developing an EHR SmartForm© to monitor side effects of oral oncolytics during routine telehealth encounters.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Angela M StoverDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1101-G McGavran-Greenberg Hall (CB# 7411), Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Lori D McLeodRTI Health Solutions, 3040 Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA. lmcleod@rti.org.
Michelle M LangerLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Wen-Hung ChenRTI Health Solutions, 3040 Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA.
Bryce B ReeveDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1101-G McGavran-Greenberg Hall (CB# 7411), Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis paper is part of a series comparing different psychometric approaches to evaluate patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures using the same items and dataset. We provide an overview and example application to demonstrate 1) using item response theory (IRT) to identify poor and well performing items; 2) testing if items perform differently based on demographic characteristics (differential item functioning, DIF); and 3) balancing IRT and content validity considerations to select items for short forms.

methodsModel fit, local dependence, and DIF were examined for 51 items initially considered for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Depression item bank. Samejima's graded response model was used to examine how well each item measured severity levels of depression and how well it distinguished between individuals with high and low levels of depression. Two short forms were constructed based on psychometric properties and consensus discussions with instrument developers, including psychometricians and content experts. Calibrations presented here are for didactic purposes and are not intended to replace official PROMIS parameters or to be used for research.

resultsOf the 51 depression items, 14 exhibited local dependence, 3 exhibited DIF for gender, and 9 exhibited misfit, and these items were removed from consideration for short forms. Short form 1 prioritized content, and thus items were chosen to meet DSM-V criteria rather than being discarded for lower discrimination parameters. Short form 2 prioritized well performing items, and thus fewer DSM-V criteria were satisfied. Short forms 1-2 performed similarly for model fit statistics, but short form 2 provided greater item precision.

conclusionsIRT is a family of flexible models providing item- and scale-level information, making it a powerful tool for scale construction and refinement. Strengths of IRT models include placing respondents and items on the same metric, testing DIF across demographic or clinical subgroups, and facilitating creation of targeted short forms. Limitations include large sample sizes to obtain stable item parameters, and necessary familiarity with measurement methods to interpret results. Combining psychometric data with stakeholder input (including people with lived experiences of the health condition and clinicians) is highly recommended for scale development and evaluation.

Indexed as

Item response theoryMeasurementPROMIS®Scale constructionScale evaluation

Identifiers

PMID31359210
PMCPMC6663947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.