ArticleBMC public health2025
Reference values for the PROMIS
Article in BMC public health, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to obtain general population-based Korean reference values for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) item bank v2.0 and to compare them with US and Netherlands reference values.
methodsIn April 2021, we surveyed Korean representative participants (N = 2,124) using the PROMIS PF item bank. We compared the mean T-scores of the Netherlands (N = 1,310) and US populations (N = 1,646) using ANOVA by age group, sex, presence of comorbidities, and general health. We also performed Differential item functioning (DIF) analyses between the US and Korea populations.
resultsIn Korean, the PF T-score was 55.3 (SD = 9.1), ranging from 28.7 to 77.6. This score was higher compared to the mean score of 50.0 in the US and 49.8 in the Netherlands general populations. Differences in PF were generally observed in all age and sex groups. In the PF item bank, 57 of 131 items were flagged for uniform or nonuniform DIF. Among the general population in Korea, older adults, women, those with lower levels of education, and those with comorbidities had lower levels of PF compared to their counterparts in the general Korean population.
conclusionsConsidering the cultural differences between Western and Asian countries, we recommend establishing country-specific reference values on a global scale.
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.