Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35998333›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Towards standardization of measuring anxiety and depression: Differential item functioning for language and Dutch reference values of PROMIS item banks.

Ellen B M Elsman, Gerard Flens, Edwin de Beurs, Leo D Roorda, Caroline B Terwee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Using a measurement type-independent metric to compare patterns of determinants between patient-reported versus performance-based physical function in hemodialysis patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Measurement properties of the Dutch PROMIS-29 v2.1 profile in people with and without chronic conditions.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ellen B M ElsmanDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0680-6430
Gerard FlensAlliance for Quality in Mental Health Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Edwin de BeursArkin GGZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Leo D RoordaAmsterdam Rehabilitation Research Center | Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Caroline B TerweeDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLLeiden University · NLReade · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe outcomes anxiety and depression are measured frequently by healthcare providers to assess the impact of a disease, but with numerous instruments. PROMIS item banks provide an opportunity for standardized measurement. Cross-cultural validity of measures and the availability of reference values are prerequisites for standardized measurement.

methodsPROMIS Anxiety and Depression item banks were completed by 1002 representative Dutch persons. To evaluate cross-cultural validity, data from US participants in PROMIS wave 1 were used and differential item functioning (DIF) was investigated, using an iterative hybrid of logistic regression and item response theory. McFadden's pseudo R2-change of 2% was the critical threshold. The impact of any DIF on full item banks and short forms was investigated. To obtain Dutch reference values, T-scores for anxiety and depression were calculated for the complete Dutch sample, and age-group and gender subpopulations. Thresholds corresponding to normal limits, mild, moderate and severe symptoms were computed.

resultsIn both item banks, two items had DIF but with minimal impact on population level T-scores for full item banks and short forms. The Dutch general population had a T-score of 49.9 for anxiety and 49.6 for depression, similar to the T-scores of 50.0 of the US general population. T-scores for age-group and gender subpopulations were also similar to T-scores of the US general population. Thresholds for mild, moderate and severe anxiety and depression were set to 55, 60 and 70, identical to US thresholds.

conclusionsThe limited number of items with DIF and its minimal impact, enables the use of standard (US) item parameters and comparisons of scores between Dutch and US populations. The Dutch reference values provide an important tool for healthcare professionals and researchers to evaluate and interpret symptoms of anxiety and depression, stimulating the uptake of PROMIS measures, and contributing to standardized outcome measurement.

Indexed as

DepressionLanguageAnxietyHumansPsychometricsQuality of LifeReference StandardsReference ValuesReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35998333
PMCPMC9398458
OpenAlexW4292787717

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.