CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 207Psychometric Methodologies and TestingCancer survivorship and careHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PROMIS fatigue, pain intensity, pain interference, pain behavior, physical function, depression, anxiety, and anger scales demonstrate ecological validity

Stone, Arthur A., Broderick, Joan E., Junghaenel, Doerte U., Schneider, Stefan, Schwartz, Joseph E.·2016·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.029
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives Ecological validity refers to the degree to which instruments faithfully capture information in respondents' natural environments. We examined the ecological validity of eight instruments from the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), most of which use 7-day reporting periods, by comparing PROMIS scores with daily diary data as a standard. Study design and setting Five groups of approximately 100 respondents each completed daily diaries and weekly PROMIS instruments for 4 consecutive weeks: community residents; osteoarthritis patients; women experiencing premenstrual syndrome; men undergoing hernia surgery; and breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. The last three groups experienced events (menses, surgery, or chemotherapy, respectively) at standardized times in the protocol to examine symptom changes attributable to these events. Results We examined the ability of the PROMIS scales to replicate between-group differences in diaries, to replicate week-to-week changes in diaries, and the correlation between diary and PROMIS scales. As a secondary aim, we examined known-group differences with the PROMIS measures. All three types of ecological validity were strongly confirmed, as was known-group validity for the PROMIS recall scales. Conclusion This study adds to the growing literature supporting the reliability and validity of the family of PROMIS instruments.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.029

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Stone, 2004, Understanding recall of weekly pain from a momentary assessment perspective: absolute agreement, between- and within-person consistency, and judged change in weekly pain, Pain, 107, 61, 10.1016/j.pain.2003.09.020 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 207

Related

Metadata

Authors
Stone, A. A., Broderick, J. E., Junghaenel, D. U., Schneider, S., & Schwartz, J. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Stony Brook University (US)
Corresponding author
Stone, Arthur A.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
74
Pages
194-206
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.029
OpenAlex
W2175760214
Cited by
207
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6
FWCI
11.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Northwestern University (U54AR057951, U01AR052177, U54AR057943)
  • American Institutes for Research (U54AR057926)
  • State University of New York (U01AR057948, U01AR052170)
  • University of Washington (U01AR057954, U01AR052171)
  • University of North Carolina (U01AR052181)
  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (U01AR057956)
  • Stanford University (U01AR052158)
  • Boston University (U01AR057929)
  • University of California (U01AR057936)
  • University of Pittsburgh (U01AR052155)
  • Georgetown University (U01AR057971)
  • Children's Hospital Medical Center (U01AR057940)
  • University of Maryland (U01AR057967)
  • Duke University (U01AR052186)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
PROMIS, ecological validity, daily diary, fatigue, pain intensity, pain interference, pain behavior, physical function, depression, anxiety, anger, known-groups validity, osteoarthritis, premenstrual syndrome, hernia repair, breast cancer chemotherapy, patient-reported outcomes
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Anger, Anxiety Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Fatigue, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results, Exercise, Comorbidity, Self Report, Patient Outcome Assessment

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