ArticleJournal of clinical epidemiology2023
Physical performance tasks were linked to the PROMIS physical function metric in patients undergoing hemodialysis.
Article in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2024Trial
- Beyond performance: the role of illness perception and internal comparison standards in patient-reported physical function assessments.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Bridging patient-reported outcomes and performance assessments in older adults: linking the Short Physical Performance Battery to the standardised PROMIS Physical Function scale.Age and ageing · 2026Article
- Towards Standardized Assessment of Outcomes in Back Pain-Validation of Linking Studies Between Disease-Specific and Generic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether a multi-item performance outcome measure, the physical performance test (PPT), can be calibrated to a common scale with patient-reported outcome measures, using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) metric. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingWe analyzed baseline data (N = 1,113) from the CONVINCE study, an international trial in end-stage kidney disease patients comparing high-dose hemodiafiltration with high-flux hemodialysis. Assumptions of item response theory (IRT) modelling were investigated for the combined set of the nine-item PPT and a four-item PROMIS PF short form (PROMIS-PF4a). We applied unidimensional IRT linking for calibrating the PPT to the PROMIS PF metric.
resultsAlthough some evidence for multidimensionality was found, classical test statistics (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.93), Mokken (Loevinger's H = 0.50), and bifactor analysis (explained common variance = 0.65) indicated that PPT and PROMIS-PF4a items can be used to assess a common PF construct. On the group level, the agreement between PROMIS-PF4a and linked PPT scores was stable across several subsamples. On the individual level, scores differed considerably.
conclusionWe found preliminary evidence that the PPT can be linked to the PROMIS PF metric in hemodialysis patients, enabling group comparisons across patient-reported outcome and performance outcome measures. Alternative linking methods should be applied in future studies using a more comprehensive PROMIS PF item set.
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.