The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008
Open accessAbstract
Objectives Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential when evaluating many new treatments in health care; yet, current measures have been limited by a lack of precision, standardization, and comparability of scores across studies and diseases. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) provides item banks that offer the potential for efficient (minimizes item number without compromising reliability), flexible (enables optional use of interchangeable items), and precise (has minimal error in estimate) measurement of commonly studied PROs. We report results from the first large-scale testing of PROMIS items.Study design and setting Fourteen item pools were tested in the U.S. general population and clinical groups using an online panel and clinic recruitment. A scale-setting subsample was created reflecting demographics proportional to the 2000 U.S. census.Results Using item-response theory (graded response model), 11 item banks were calibrated on a sample of 21,133, measuring components of self-reported physical, mental, and social health, along with a 10-item Global Health Scale. Short forms from each bank were developed and compared with the overall bank and with other well-validated and widely accepted ("legacy") measures. All item banks demonstrated good reliability across most of the score distributions. Construct validity was supported by moderate to strong correlations with legacy measures.Conclusion PROMIS item banks and their short forms provide evidence that they are reliable and precise measures of generic symptoms and functional reports comparable to legacy instruments. Further testing will continue to validate and test PROMIS items and banks in diverse clinical populations.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Anxiety, pain, and depression were assessed using the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Anxiety Short Form 8a (PROMIS-ASF), Pain Interference Short Form (PROMIS-PISF), and Depression Short Form 8a (PROMIS-DSF) 36.”
From Effects of a trauma-informed mindful recovery program on comorbid pain, anxiety, and substance use during primary care buprenorphine treatment: A proof-of-concept study (2023) · cites this paper as [36]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“PROMIS has excellent psychometric properties superior to many other measures available to assess emotional functioning [61].”
From Online parent-targeted cognitive-behavioural therapy intervention to improve quality of life in families of young cancer survivors: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. (2015) · cites this paper as [61]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Scales with four, six, and eight items (short forms) were developed from item banks using item response theory and validated in general and chronic illness populations [28, 29].”
From Feasibility and Acceptability of an Abbreviated, Four-Week Mindfulness Program for Chronic Pain Management. (2020) · cites this paper as [28]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These measures have undergone rigorous reliability and validity testing [29–31].”
From Symptom experiences in metastatic breast cancer patients: relationships to activity engagement, value-based living, and psychological inflexibility (2017) · cites this paper as [30]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These NIH-funded measures have undergone rigorous psychometric testing [21], and evidence supports their reliability and validity in cancer survivors [19, 22].”
From Symptom experiences in post-treatment cancer survivors: associations with acceptance and commitment therapy constructs. (2021) · cites this paper as [21]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Construct validity has been demonstrated with moderate to strong correlations with other well-validated measures. 61”
From Mindfulness and Psychosocial Symptoms in People with Cancer: Testing Rumination and Experiential Avoidance as Mediators, and Sex as a Moderator. (2025) · cites this paper as [61]
In the citing paper
“After considering several potential instruments for assessing these domains, the RTF concluded that the short-form PROMIS measures1 offered the best trade-off of length with psychometric validity for a minimal dataset.”
From Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain. (2014) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Personalizing the second line treatment choice through machine learning identified a small group of individuals (around 8%) who would fare better if continued unchanged on their initial treatment. 599”
From Time for united action on depression: a Lancet–World Psychiatric Association Commission (2022) · cites this paper as [599]
In the citing paper
“Machine learning techniques using big datasets offer a promising approach to developing personalized treatments of depression and prediction models for treatment outcomes. 599”
From Time for united action on depression: a Lancet–World Psychiatric Association Commission (2022) · cites this paper as [599]
In the citing paper
“Sleep disturbance (ie, sleep quality) was measured using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) (α=0.97 in our sample) [62].”
From Efficacy of the Mindfulness Meditation Mobile App “Calm” to Reduce Stress Among College Students: Randomized Controlled Trial (2019) · cites this paper as [62]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.100.3.316 · Cited by 4,601 · cited 1×
“PROMIS adopted a hierarchical structure to explain the relationships between self-reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, and anger [20,21].”
Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires
McDowell, I., & Newell, C. (1987) · Cited by 4,207
Classification of Chronic Pain: Descriptions of Chronic Pain Syndromes and Definitions of Pain Terms
Merskey, H. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,362
Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., Ader, D., Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., & Rose, M. (2007) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55 · Cited by 3,118 · cited 5×
“To inform PROMIS item selection and development, we analyzed 11 large data sets with self-report data on the five broad PROMIS core domains: pain, fatigue, emotional distress, physical function, and social function [1,29,31,32].”
InfluentialSelf-citationWilson, I. B. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520250075037 · Cited by 3,027
Measuring Functioning and Well-Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach
Stewart, A., & Ware, J. (1992) · doi:10.7249/cb361 · Cited by 2,689 · cited 1×
“Global health items have been found to be consistently predictive of important future events, such as health care utilization and mortality [8,14,18].”
Differential Item Functioning.
Gudgeon, A. C., Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348590 · Cited by 2,088
Inventory of interpersonal problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications.
Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., Baer, B. A., Ureño, G., & Villaseñor, V. S. (1988) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.56.6.885 · Cited by 2,026 · cited 1×
“These include social support and interpersonal attributes independent of particular roles, such as intimacy, assertiveness, sociability, submissiveness, and interpersonal control [24].”
Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K. L., & Cella, D. (2009) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-009-9496-9 · Cited by 1,957 · cited 3×
“To inform PROMIS item selection and development, we analyzed 11 large data sets with self-report data on the five broad PROMIS core domains: pain, fatigue, emotional distress, physical function, and social function [1,29,31,32].”
Self-citationClassification of Chronic Pain—Descriptions of Chronic Pain Syndromes and Definitions of Pain Terms
Harvey, A. M. (1995) · Clinical Journal of Pain · doi:10.1097/00002508-199506000-00024 · Cited by 1,787
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Liu, 2010, Representativeness of the PROMIS Internet panel, J Clin Epidemiol, 63, 1168
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pilkonis, P. A., Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Stover, A. M., Riley, W. T., Cella, D., & PROMIS Cooperative Group (2011) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191111411667 · Cited by 2,132
Self-citationInitial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5
Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2012) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291711002674 · Cited by 1,908
Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America
Smith, M. A., Saunders, R., Stuckhardt, L., & McGinnis, J. M. (2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.51-3277 · Cited by 1,358
Nociplastic pain: towards an understanding of prevalent pain conditions
Fitzcharles, M.-A., Cohen, S. P., Clauw, D. J., Littlejohn, G., Usui, C., & Häuser, W. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00392-5 · Cited by 1,253
Basch, E., Reeve, B. B., Mitchell, S. A., Clauser, S. B., Minasian, L. M., Dueck, A. C., Mendoza, T. R., Hay, J. L., Atkinson, T. M., Abernethy, A. P., et al. (2014) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/dju244 · Cited by 1,167
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., Amtmann, D., Bode, R., Buysse, D., Choi, S., Cook, K., DeVellis, R., DeWalt, D., Fries, J. F., Gershon, R., Hahn, E. A., Lai, J.-S., Pilkonis, P., Revicki, D., Rose, M., Weinfurt, K., & Hays, R.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (US)
- Stony Brook University (US)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- Universität Hamburg (DE)
- Duke University (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1179-1194
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2965562
- OpenAlex
- W2162420979
- Cited by
- 5,128
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 455 · 2025: 526 · 2024: 536 · 2023: 490 · 2022: 516 · 2021: 515 · 2020: 492 · 2019: 368 · 2018: 302 · 2017: 224 · 2016: 190 · 2015: 161 · 2014: 131 · 2013: 107 · 2012: 53
- FWCI
- 92.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
- UNC Libraries
- Funders
- Northwestern University
- University of Washington (U01AR52170, U01AR52155, U01AR52171, U01AR52158)
- University of Pittsburgh (U01AR52155, U01AR52158, U01AR52170, U01AR52171)
- Stony Brook University (U01AR52170)
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (U01AR052171, U01AR52186, U01AR52181, U01AR52155, U02AR52177, U01AR052186, U01AR52171, U01AR052170, U01AR052158, U01AR52170, U01AR052155, U01AR052177, U01AR52158, U01AR052181)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
- Keywords
- PROMIS, patient-reported outcomes, item bank, item response theory, graded response model, scale calibration, short form, construct validity, reliability statistics, global health, physical health, mental health, social health, functional status
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Health Status, Health Surveys, Humans, Information Systems, Male, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Disclosure, United States, Patient Satisfaction, Outcome Assessment, Health Care
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
