Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35622294›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2022

The patient-reported outcomes measurement information systems (PROMIS®) physical function and its derivative measures in adults: a systematic review of content validity.

V J Zonjee, I L Abma, M J de Mooij, S M van Schaik, R M Van den Berg-Vos, L D Roorda, C B Terwee

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Content analysis of PROMIS physical function banks using the international classification of functioning, disability and health.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  3. Clinical relevance of current patient-reported outcome measures for ankle fracture: surgeons' perspective.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2024
    Article
  4. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures version 2.0.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

V J ZonjeeDepartment of Neurology, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. v.j.zonjee@olvg.nl.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8349-6464
I L AbmaIQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
M J de MooijDepartment of Neurology, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
S M van SchaikDepartment of Neurology, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
R M Van den Berg-VosDepartment of Neurology, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
L D RoordaAmsterdam Rehabilitation Research Center | Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C B TerweeDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
OLVG · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLReade · NL

Funding

Stichting Kwaliteitsgelden Medisch Specialisten 53070331
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aims to systematically review and critically appraise the content validity of the adult versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) item bank and its derivative measures in any adult population.

methodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in October 2021 for studies on measurement properties of PROMIS-PF measures in an adult population. Studies were included if the study described the development of a PROMIS-PF measure or investigated its relevance, comprehensiveness, or comprehensibility. Assessment of the methodological quality of eligible studies, rating of results, and summarizing evidence was performed following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for assessing content validity. A modified GRADE approach was used to determine the level of evidence.

resultsThree development studies and eight studies on the content validity of one or more of the PROMIS-PF measures were identified. The methodological quality of most studies was rated doubtful. There was low to high level evidence for sufficient relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of most PROMIS-PF measures for healthy seniors and various disease populations. We found low to moderate level evidence for insufficient relevance of PROMIS-PF measures for patients with conditions that affected only one body part, and insufficient comprehensibility of the PROMIS-PF measures for minority elderly.

conclusionMost PROMIS-PF measures demonstrate sufficient content validity in healthy seniors and various disease populations. However, the quality of this evidence is generally low to moderate, due to limitations in the methodological quality of the studies.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAdultAgedConsensusHealth StatusHumansInformation SystemsContent validityCOSMINPhysical functionPROMISSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35622294
OpenAlexW4281646513

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.