The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference
Open accessAbstract
This paper describes the psychometric properties of the PROMIS-pain interference (PROMIS-PI) bank. An initial candidate item pool (n=644) was developed and evaluated based on the review of existing instruments, interviews with patients, and consultation with pain experts. From this pool, a candidate item bank of 56 items was selected and responses to the items were collected from large community and clinical samples. A total of 14,848 participants responded to all or a subset of candidate items. The responses were calibrated using an item response theory (IRT) model. A final 41-item bank was evaluated with respect to IRT assumptions, model fit, differential item function (DIF), precision, and construct and concurrent validity. Items of the revised bank had good fit to the IRT model (CFI and NNFI/TLI ranged from 0.974 to 0.997), and the data were strongly unidimensional (e.g., ratio of first and second eigenvalue=35). Nine items exhibited statistically significant DIF. However, adjusting for DIF had little practical impact on score estimates and the items were retained without modifying scoring. Scores provided substantial information across levels of pain; for scores in the T-score range 50-80, the reliability was equivalent to 0.96-0.99. Patterns of correlations with other health outcomes supported the construct validity of the item bank. The scores discriminated among persons with different numbers of chronic conditions, disabling conditions, levels of self-reported health, and pain intensity (p<0.0001). The results indicated that the PROMIS-PI items constitute a psychometrically sound bank. Computerized adaptive testing and short forms are available.
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
“PROMIS-Pain Interference measures the extent to which pain interferes with a patient’s physical, mental, emotional, and social activities in the past seven days and is highly reliable.23”
From Mindfulness is associated with psychological health and moderates the impact of fibromyalgia (2019) · cites this paper as [23]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Extensive effort has been made to validate the PROMIS measures,5, 7, 21, 51, 55, 72, 89, 92, 95 but there is modest information on their performance specifically in the context of cLBP.”
From Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain. (2014) · cites this paper as [5]
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
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
(1998) · Cited by 36,049
(1992) · PubMed · Cited by 33,716
The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection
Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002 · Cited by 30,033
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Clogg, C. C., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1995) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580595 · Cited by 8,246
Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory.
Cs, C., & Km, R. (1994) · PubMed · Cited by 5,178
HUSKISSON, E. C. (1974) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(74)90884-8 · Cited by 4,533
Cited by
Sorted by citations
PROMIS®-29 v2.0 profile physical and mental health summary scores
Hays, R. D., Spritzer, K. L., Schalet, B. D., & Cella, D. (2018) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-018-1842-3 · Cited by 684
Self-citationPROMIS® Adult Health Profiles: Efficient Short-Form Measures of Seven Health Domains
Cella, D., Choi, S. W., Condon, D. M., Schalet, B., Hays, R. D., Rothrock, N. E., Yount, S., Cook, K. F., Gershon, R. C., Amtmann, D., et al. (2019) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.004 · Cited by 665
Self-citationThe validity of pain intensity measures: what do the NRS, VAS, VRS, and FPS-R measure?
Thong, I. S. K., Jensen, M. P., Miró, J., & Tan, G. (2018) · Scandinavian Journal of Pain · doi:10.1515/sjpain-2018-0012 · Cited by 652
Self-citationReport of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain.
Deyo, R. A., Dworkin, S. F., Amtmann, D., Andersson, G., Borenstein, D., Carragee, E., Carrino, J., Chou, R., Cook, K., DeLitto, A., et al. (2014) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2014.03.005 · Cited by 533
Self-citationDumanian, G. A., Potter, B. K., Mioton, L. M., Ko, J. H., Cheesborough, J. E., Souza, J. M., Ertl, W. J., Tintle, S. M., Nanos, G. P., Valerio, I. L., et al. (2019) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000003088 · Cited by 530
Metadata
- Authors
- Amtmann, D., Cook, K. F., Jensen, M. P., Chen, W.-H., Choi, S., Revicki, D., Cella, D., Rothrock, N., Keefe, F., Callahan, L., & Lai, J.-S.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- United BioSource Corporation (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Duke University (US)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Corresponding author
- Amtmann, Dagmar
- ORCID
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 2010-07
- Volume
- 150
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 173-182
- ISSN
- 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2916053
- OpenAlex
- W1985564128
- Cited by
- 1,199
- References
- 61
- Citations by year
- 2026: 117 · 2025: 128 · 2024: 135 · 2023: 120 · 2022: 114 · 2021: 112 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 17.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
- UNC Libraries
- Funders
- Northwestern University (U01AR52177)
- 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, U01 AR 52177, U01AR52181, U01AR52155, U01AR052186, U01AR52171, U01AR052170, U01AR052158, U01AR52170, U01AR052155, U01AR052177, U01AR52158, U01AR052181)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Keywords
- PROMIS, pain interference, item bank, patient-reported outcomes, item response theory, differential item functioning, construct validity, concurrent validity, chronic pain, computerized adaptive testing, short form
- MeSH terms
- Activities of Daily Living, Disability Evaluation, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Pain, Psychometrics, Quality of Life
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
