ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Putting CATs and item banks to work: How to construct predictive and sensitive PROMIS screeners for use in ambulatory oncology.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIncorporating PROMs into routine clinical care comes with numerous challenges, including pressure to move patients through office visits with brief, efficient assessments. The purpose of our study was to select and evaluate very short PROMIS screeners with full-bank simulations and predictive accuracy analysis.
methodsWe identified candidate pairs of items for PROMIS Anxiety, Depression, Pain Interference, Fatigue, and Physical Function, on the basis of frequently selected CAT items at both normal and clinical thresholds. We then simulated full-bank responses for 10,000 patients with a T-score mean of 50 in Fatigue, Depression, Pain Interference, and Anxiety, but 45 for Physical Function. We scored candidate 2-item short-form pairs, but also evaluated a 1-item screener and a 4-item fixed CAT for comparison purposes. Clinical thresholds were set at 1 SD in the direction of worse health; diagnostic values were computed based on agreement with full-bank T-scores. We aimed for sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPV) above 0.80, considering also diversity and redundancy of content.
resultsAverage sensitivity of our chosen 2-item pairs across the five domains was 0.84 (range 0.80-0.89), while the average PPV was 0.82 (0.80-0.85). While the 1-item screeners for Anxiety and Depression performed poorly, they met or approached our criteria for Pain Interference, Fatigue and Physical Function.
conclusionFive 2-item customized PROMIS forms are available for use in routine clinical care, such as distress screening in oncology. Our study provides a useful complement to psychometric criteria, helping to minimize misclassification of patients in need during screening.
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.