ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2023
Development and psychometric evaluation of the PMR-Impact Scale: a new patient reported outcome measure for polymyalgia rheumatica.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2023. 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 5 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.
Validation of the Polymyalgia Rheumatica Activity Score for Determination of Disease Activity
Using Personalized Rehabilitation to Reduce Disease and Increase Activity of Patients With Polymyalgia Rheumatica: a Feasibility Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concordance and agreement between different activity scores in polymyalgia rheumatica.RMD open · 2024Trial
- Modern Management of Isolated Polymyalgia Rheumatica.Rheumatology and therapy · 2025Review
- Which fatigue scale should I use? A Rasch analysis of two fatigue scales in inflammatory conditions.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- External validation of the polymyalgia rheumatica impact scale: a prospective cohort study.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2025Article
- [Methods for assessment of disease activity of polymyalgia rheumatica].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPMR causes pain, stiffness and disability in older adults. Measuring the impact of the condition from the patient's perspective is vital to high-quality research and patient-centred care, yet there are no validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for PMR. We set out to develop and psychometrically evaluate a PMR-specific PROM.
methodsTwo cross-sectional postal surveys of people with a confirmed diagnosis of PMR were used to provide data for field testing and psychometric evaluation. A total of 256 participants completed the draft PROM. Distribution of item responses was examined, and exploratory factor analysis and Rasch analysis were used to inform item reduction, formation of dimension structure and scoring system development. Some 179 participants completed the PROM at two time points, along with comparator questionnaires and anchor questions. Test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness were evaluated.
resultsResults from the field-testing study led to the formation of the PMR-Impact Scale (PMR-IS), comprising four domains (symptoms, function, psychological and emotional well-being, and steroid side effects). Construct validity and test-retest reliability met accepted quality criteria for each domain. There was insufficient evidence from this study to determine its ability to detect flares/deterioration, but the PMR-IS was responsive to improvements in the condition.
conclusionThe PMR-IS offers researchers a new way to assess patient-reported outcomes in clinical studies of PMR. It has been developed robustly, with patient input at every stage. It has good construct validity and test-retest reliability. Further work is needed to fully establish its responsiveness and interpretability parameters, and to assess its real-world clinical utility.
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.