↓ Skip to main content

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments among individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study of floor/ceiling effects and construct…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
160 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments among individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study of floor/ceiling effects and construct validity
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0715-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey B. Driban, Nani Morgan, Lori Lyn Price, Karon F. Cook, Chenchen Wang

Abstract

The psychometric properties of Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments have been explored in a number of general and clinical samples. No study, however, has evaluated the psychometric function of these measures in individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (KOA). The aim of this project was to evaluate the construct (structural) validity and floor/ceiling effects of four PROMIS measures in this population. We conducted a secondary analysis of baseline data from a randomized trial comparing Tai Chi and physical therapy. Participants completed four PROMIS static short-form instruments (i.e., Anxiety, Depression, Physical Function, and Pain Interference) as well as six well-validated (legacy) measures that assess pain, function, and psychological health. We calculated descriptive statistics and percentages of participants scoring the minimum (floor) and maximum (ceiling) possible scores for PROMIS and legacy measures. We also estimated the association between PROMIS scores and scores on legacy measures using Spearman's rank correlations coefficients. Data from 204 participants were analyzed. Mean age of the sample was 60 years; 70 % were female. The PROMIS Anxiety and Depression had floor effects with 17 and 24 % of participants scoring the minimum, respectively. PROMIS Anxiety and Depression scores had strongest associations with general mental health, including stress (Perceived Stress Scale, r ≥ 0.65) and depression (Beck Depression Index-II, r = 0.70). PROMIS Pain Interference scores correlated most strongly with measures of whole body pain (Short-Form 36 Bodily Pain, r = -0.73) and physical health (Short-Form 36 Physical-Component Summary, r = -0.73); their correlations were lower with other legacy measures, including with the WOMAC knee-specific pain (r = 0.47). PROMIS Physical Function scores had stronger associations with scores on the Short-Form 36 Physical Function (r = 0.79) than with scores on other legacy measures. The four PROMIS static-short forms performed well among individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis as evidenced in correlations with legacy measures. PROMIS Anxiety and Depression target general mental health (e.g., stress, depression), and PROMIS Pain Interference and Physical Function static-short forms target whole-body outcomes among participants with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Floor effects in the PROMIS Anxiety and Depression scores should be considered if needing to distinguish among patients with very low levels of these outcomes. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01258985 . Registered 10 December 2010.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 166 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 18%
Researcher 27 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 14 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 35 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 32%
Psychology 20 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 12%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Neuroscience 5 3%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 46 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,852,893
of 17,733,079 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#387
of 3,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,321
of 286,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,733,079 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them