ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
The PROMIS-16 reproduces the PROMIS-29 physical and mental health summary scores accurately in a probability-based internet panel.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- A direct comparison of the measurement properties of the PROMIS-16 and EQ-5D-5L in the U.S. general population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Preferred Sources For Suicide Prevention And Crisis Services Among Segments Of The US Adult Population.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2025Article
- Longitudinal validation of the PROMIS-16 in a sample of adults in the United States with back pain.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Biases in Artificial Intelligence Application in Pain Medicine.Journal of pain research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS)-16 assesses the same multi-item domains but does not include the pain intensity item in the PROMIS-29. We evaluate how well physical and mental health summary scores estimated from the PROMIS-16 reproduce those estimated using the PROMIS-29.
methodsAn evaluation of data collected from 4130 respondents from the KnowledgePanel. Analyses include confirmatory factor analysis to assess physical and mental health latent variables based on PROMIS-16 scores, reliability estimates for the PROMIS measures, mean differences and correlations of scores estimated by the PROMIS-16 with those estimated by the PROMIS-29, and associations between differences in corresponding PROMIS-16 and PROMIS-29 scores by sociodemographic characteristics.
resultsA two-factor (physical and mental health) model adequately fits the PROMIS-16 scores. Reliability estimates for the PROMIS-16 measures were slightly lower than for the PROMIS-29 measures. There were minimal differences between PROMIS physical and mental health summary scores estimated using the PROMIS-16 or the PROMIS-29. PROMIS-16 and PROMIS-29 score differences by sociodemographic characteristics were small. Using the PROMIS pain intensity item when scoring the PROMIS-16 produced similar estimates of physical and mental health summary scores.
conclusionThe PROMIS-16 provides similar estimates of the PROMIS-29 physical and mental health summary scores. The high reliability of these scores indicates they are accurate enough for use with individual patients.
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.