Cited by 18Cancer survivorship and carePsychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Comparing PROMIS computer-adaptive tests to the Brief Symptom Inventory in patients with prostate cancer

Open access
Baum, George, Basen-Engquist, Karen, Swartz, Maria C., Parker, Patricia A., Carmack, Cindy L.·2014·Quality of Life Research

Abstract

Purpose This study assessed whether the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer-adaptive tests (CATs) provided results similar to those of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) with a low patient burden.Methods Secondary data analysis of 136 prostate cancer patients who completed the 53-item BSI and the PROMIS CATs assessing depression, anxiety, and hostility.Results The PROMIS CATs and BSI correlated significantly in measures of depression (.85), anxiety (.76), and anger/hostility (.66; p < .001 for all). Using our BSI cutoff points for depression, anxiety, and anger/hostility, ROC analysis yielded areas under the curve of .966 [standard error (SE) = .014, p < .001], .975 (SE = .012, p < .001), and .952 (SE = .027, p < .001), respectively.Conclusions PROMIS CATs were highly correlated with the BSI subscales, indicating that the CATs performed well compared with the BSI, a widely used psychosocial measure.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11136-014-0647-2

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • PROMIS measures were initially developed with cancer patients' input, and a growing body of research has documented their reliability and validity for use with cancer patients, including those with advanced disease.

    “PROMIS measures were initially developed with cancer patients’ input [32], and a growing body of research has documented the measures’ reliability and validity for use with cancer patients, including those with advanced disease [33–35].”

    From Symptom experiences in metastatic breast cancer patients: relationships to activity engagement, value-based living, and psychological inflexibility (2017) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Introduction and Results report a study of non-metastatic prostate cancer patients in which PROMIS computer-adaptive tests correlated significantly with the Brief Symptom Inventory, supporting validity in that group. The paper does not report reliability testing or establish validity in patients with advanced disease. The separate claim about cancer patients’ input is attached to citation [32], not this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [14]Herr HW Kornblith AB Ofman U A comparison of the quality of life of patients with metastatic prostate cancer who received or did not receive hormonal therapy. Cancer 1993 71 3 Suppl 1143 50 8428337

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baum, G., Basen-Engquist, K., Swartz, M. C., Parker, P. A., & Carmack, C. L.
Affiliations
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Carmack, Cindy L.
Venue
Quality of Life Research
Published
2014-02-16
Volume
23
Issue
7
Pages
2031-2035
ISSN
  • 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2649
OpenAlex
W2001831290
Cited by
18
References
24
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6
FWCI
1.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Quality of Life Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r21ca126854-02)
  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
  • National Cancer Institute (CA-16672, R21 CA126854, 5R21CA126854-02, P30CA016672)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
PROMIS, computerized adaptive testing, Brief Symptom Inventory, prostate cancer, depression, anxiety, hostility, patient-reported outcomes, psychosocial assessment, psychometric validation, receiver operating characteristic
MeSH terms
Aged, Anger, Anxiety, Computers, Depression, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prostatic Neoplasms, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, ROC Curve

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review