Observational studyPloS one2025
Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change of Dutch-Flemish Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Computerized Adaptive Tests for musculoskeletal disorders.
Observational study in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change (MDC) of the Dutch-Flemish Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (DF-PROMIS) Pain Interference (PI) v1.1, Physical Function (PF) v1.2, and Upper Extremity (UE) v2.0 computerized adaptive tests (CATs) in patients with musculoskeletal conditions receiving physical therapy in primary care.
designObservational cohort study.
methodsPatients with musculoskeletal conditions of the spine or upper extremity were recruited from fourteen physical therapy practices. Participants completed DF-PROMIS CATs at baseline and again three to fourteen days later. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (two-way random effects, absolute agreement) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Reliability at the participant-level was visually represented by plotting test-retest scores with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsData from 225 patients were analyzed. The DF-PROMIS CATs demonstrated sufficient test-retest reliability, with ICC values ranging from 0.79 to 0.91. MDC values ranged from 4.80 to 6.08 across all measurements. Participant-level reliability was high (0.9-0.95) for most measurements but lower for scores further from the mean. The 95% CIs for test-retest measurements overlapped in 95.3% of measurement pairs.
conclusionThe DF-PROMIS PF, UE, and PI domain CATs demonstrated sufficient reliability and precision in patients with musculoskeletal conditions receiving physical therapy in primary care practices. Future research should focus on implementing DF-PROMIS CATs in clinical practice, examining their responsiveness, and evaluating their feasibility. Adoption of DF-PROMIS domains as outcomes in intervention studies and clinical practice will enhance interpretability and comparability of results across different patient groups.
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.