Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Qual Life Res. 2018 Apr;27(4):999-1014. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1785-8. Epub 2018 Jan 19.

Measurement invariance and general population reference values of the PROMIS Profile 29 in the UK, France, and Germany.

Author information

1
Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. felix.fischer@charite.de.
2
The Psychometrics Centre, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
3
The Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
4
APEMAC, EA 4360, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France.
5
Epidemiology Unit, Hôtel Dieu, Assistance Publique, Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France.
6
Health Services & Policy Research Group, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
7
Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
8
Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, USA.
9
Département d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences, Laboratoire SPHERE, UMR 7219, CNRS-Université Paris Diderot - Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Comparability of patient-reported outcome measures over different languages is essential to allow cross-national research. We investigate the comparability of the PROMIS Profile 29, a generic health-related quality of life measure, in general population samples in the UK, France, and Germany and present general population reference values.

METHODS:

A web-based survey was simultaneously conducted in the UK (n = 1509), France (1501), and Germany (1502). Along with the PROMIS Profile 29, we collected sociodemographic information as well as the EQ-5D. We tested measurement invariance by means of multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Differences in the health-related quality of life between countries were modeled by linear regression analysis. We present general population reference data for the included PROMIS domains utilizing plausible value imputation and quantile regression.

RESULTS:

Multigroup CFA of the PROMIS Profile 29 showed that factor means are insensitive to potential measurement bias except in one item. We observed significant differences in patient-reported health between countries, which could be partially explained by the differences in overall ratings of health. The physical function and pain interference scales showed considerable floor effects in the normal population in all countries.

CONCLUSIONS:

Scores derived from the PROMIS Profile 29 are largely comparable across the UK, France, and Germany. Due to the use of plausible value imputation, the presented general population reference values can be compared to data collected with other PROMIS short forms or computer-adaptive tests.

KEYWORDS:

Cross-cultural equivalence; General population reference; Item response theory; Patient-reported outcomes; Plausible value imputation; Self-reported health

PMID:
29350345
DOI:
10.1007/s11136-018-1785-8
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center