Cited by 850Sleep and related disordersPsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and Validation

Development and validation of patient-reported outcome measures for sleep disturbance and sleep-related impairments

Open access
Buysse, Daniel J., Yu, Lan, Moul, Douglas E., Germain, Anne, Stover, Angela, Dodds, Nathan E., Johnston, Kelly L., Shablesky-Cade, Melissa A. +1 more·2010·Sleep

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To develop an archive of self-report questions assessing sleep disturbance and sleep-related impairments (SRI), to develop item banks from this archive, and to validate and calibrate the item banks using classic validation techniques and item response theory analyses in a sample of clinical and community participants. DESIGN: Cross-sectional self-report study. SETTING: Academic medical center and participant homes. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand nine hundred ninety-three adults recruited from an Internet polling sample and 259 adults recruited from medical, psychiatric, and sleep clinics. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: This study was part of PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System), a National Institutes of Health Roadmap initiative. Self-report item banks were developed through an iterative process of literature searches, collecting and sorting items, expert content review, qualitative patient research, and pilot testing. Internal consistency, convergent validity, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were examined in the resulting item banks. Factor analyses identified 2 preliminary item banks, sleep disturbance and SRI. Item response theory analyses and expert content review narrowed the item banks to 27 and 16 items, respectively. Validity of the item banks was supported by moderate to high correlations with existing scales and by significant differences in sleep disturbance and SRI scores between participants with and without sleep disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The PROMIS sleep disturbance and SRI item banks have excellent measurement properties and may prove to be useful for assessing general aspects of sleep and SRI with various groups of patients and interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sleep/33.6.781

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Although the PROMIS measures have been extensively validated, there is only modest information about their performance specifically in chronic low back pain.

    “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.”
  • The PROMIS Sleep Disturbance assessment provides a global measure of sleep rather than focusing on a particular sleep disorder.

    “The PROMIS Sleep Disturbance assessment, in particular, reflects a global measure of sleep, rather than focusing on a particular disorder.”
  • Previous work has described the development and psychometric testing of the PROMIS sleep disturbance measure among adults aged 18 and older.

    “Previous work has described the development and psychometric testing of the PROMIS sleep disturbance measure among individuals age 18 and older. 31;32”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 65 · Cited by 850

Authors
Buysse, D. J., Yu, L., Moul, D. E., Germain, A., Stover, A., Dodds, N. E., Johnston, K. L., Shablesky-Cade, M. A., & Pilkonis, P. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Louisiana State University in Shreveport (US)
Corresponding author
Buysse, Daniel J.
Venue
Sleep
Published
2010-06
Volume
33
Issue
6
Pages
781-792
ISSN
  • 0161-8105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9109
OpenAlex
W1489777816
Cited by
850
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 94 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 99 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 10
FWCI
14.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SLEEP (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000005)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (U01AR052171, U01AR52186, AR052155, U01 AR 52177, U01AR52181, U01AR52155, U01AR052186, U01AR52171, U01AR052170, U01AR052158, U01AR52170, U01AR052155, U01AR052177, U01AR52158, U01AR052181)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
sleep disorders, sleep-related impairment, patient-reported outcome measures, PROMIS, item bank, item response theory, measurement validation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Disclosure, Sleep Wake Disorders, Reproducibility of Results, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Young Adult

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