The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychometric Evaluation and Calibration of Health-Related Quality of Life Item Banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The construction and evaluation of item banks to measure unidimensional constructs of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is a fundamental objective of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) project. OBJECTIVES: Item banks will be used as the foundation for developing short-form instruments and enabling computerized adaptive testing. The PROMIS Steering Committee selected 5 HRQOL domains for initial focus: physical functioning, fatigue, pain, emotional distress, and social role participation. This report provides an overview of the methods used in the PROMIS item analyses and proposed calibration of item banks. ANALYSES: Analyses include evaluation of data quality (eg, logic and range checking, spread of response distribution within an item), descriptive statistics (eg, frequencies, means), item response theory model assumptions (unidimensionality, local independence, monotonicity), model fit, differential item functioning, and item calibration for banking. RECOMMENDATIONS: Summarized are key analytic issues; recommendations are provided for future evaluations of item banks in HRQOL assessment.
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.
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
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
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
A Rasch model for partial credit scoring
Masters, G. N. (1982) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02296272 · Cited by 3,782
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
Self-citationSimulation Study of Confounder-Selection Strategies
Maldonado, G., & Greenland, S. (1993) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116813 · Cited by 2,491
Evaluation of Item Candidates: The PROMIS Qualitative Item Review
DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., & Stone, A. A. (2007) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000254567.79743.e2 · Cited by 719 · cited 2×
“CFA was selected over an exploratory analysis as the first step because each potential pool of items was carefully selected by experts to represent a dominant PRO construct through an exhaustive literature review and feedback from patients through focus groups and cognitive testing.(7) Because of the ordinal nature of…”
MethodDeveloping the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)
Ader, D. N. (2007) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000260537.45076.74 · Cited by 335
Cited by
Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., Amtmann, D., Bode, R., Buysse, D., Choi, S., et al. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011 · Cited by 5,128
“This article also builds on previous articles that have described the qualitative review process of PROMIS’ item pools [2e4] and the proposed quantitative methods [5] to be used to evaluate the large-scale data collected by PROMIS for item evaluation and calibration for PROMIS item banks.”
InfluentialSelf-citationCella, 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
Self-citationPilkonis, 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-citationFilippi, M., Bar-Or, A., Piehl, F., Preziosa, P., Solari, A., Vukusic, S., & Rocca, M. A. (2018) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-018-0041-4 · Cited by 1,562
Yu, L., Buysse, D. J., Germain, A., Moul, D. E., Stover, A., Dodds, N. E., Johnston, K. L., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2012) · Behavioral Sleep Medicine · doi:10.1080/15402002.2012.636266 · Cited by 1,241
“A more detailed description of the specific PROMIS analytic framework is available elsewhere (see Reeve et al., 2007).”
BackgroundMethod
Metadata
- Authors
- Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., Thissen, D., Revicki, D. A., Weiss, D. J., Hambleton, R. K., Liu, H., Gershon, R., Reise, S. P., Lai, J.-S., & Cella, D.
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- S22-S31
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2007010480
- Cited by
- 1,491
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 56.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychometric Evaluation and Calibration of Health-Related Quality of Life Item Banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04
- The paper
- Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., Thissen, D., Revicki, D. A., Weiss, D. J., Hambleton, R. K., Liu, H., Gershon, R., Reise, S. P., Lai, J.-S., & Cella, D. (2007). Psychometric Evaluation and Calibration of Health-Related Quality of Life Item Banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
