PROMIS – Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities

Last Updated

July 31, 2024

Purpose

The PROMIS Adult Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities profile is a 35-item self-report measure designed to assess perceived ability to perform one’s usual social roles and activities.

Link to Instrument

Instrument Details

Acronym PROMIS-APSRA

Area of Assessment

Communication
Life Participation
Quality of Life
Occupational Performance
Social Relationships

Assessment Type

Patient Reported Outcomes

Cost

Free

Actual Cost

$0.00

Cost Description

If using Computer Adaptive testing (CAT), NIH toolbox is $499.99

Cardiovascular Disease

Immune System Disorders

Organ Transplant

Rheumatic Disease

Older Adults and Geriatric Care

Non-Specific Patient Population

Mixed Populations

Joint Pain and Fractures

Cancer

35 items in full version; also 4, 6, and 8-item short form versions
When administering a short form, instruct participants to answer all of the items presented. When administering the measure via CAT, participant responses guide the system’s choice of subsequent items from the full item bank.
Minimum and maximum scores depends on the form being used
Scoring: Item-levels are scored numerically for an individual's response to each question. PROMIS recommends the best way to find the total raw score is using the free HealthMeasures Scoring Service (https://www.healthmeasures.net/images/PROMIS/manuals/PROMIS_Ability_to_Participate_in_Social_Roles_and_Activities_Scoring_Manual.pdf) or a tool that can automatically calculate scores. Scores can also be added up by hand to find the total raw score.

Then the raw score is converted to a T-score using the table in the Appendix of the link below. This standardizes the score with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. Being above or below the standard deviation could be desirable or undesirable based on the domain being measured.
Higher scores means more of the concept being measured, i.e. more ability to participate.

Number of Items

35 full version

4, 6, and 8 item short form versions

Paper and pen for paper test; iPad Air or iPad Air 2 with Wi-Fi capacity that is running iOS version 9.4 or higher; or Computer

5-20 minutes

Required Training

No Training

Adult

18 - 64

years

Elderly Adult

65 +

years

Instrument Reviewers

Holly O’Hearn, SPT

Jensyn Bradley SPT, ATC, LAT

Chi-Lun Chiao, SPT

Holt McPherson, SPT

Kenna Peters, SPT

Corinne Woodbine, SPT

Duke University, School of Medicine, Division of Physical Therapy.

Updated 4/9/2020 by Jing Cao, Rehabilitation Psychology student under the direction of Timothy Tansey, PhD, Department of Rehabilitation Psychology and Special Education, School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Updated 7/31/2023 by Kevin Fearn, MS, Shirley Ryan AbilityLab

ICF Domain

Activity
Participation

Measurement Domain

Participation & Activities

Considerations

PROMIS measures can be used in the general population and with adult populations with a chronic condition(s)
PROMIS measures have a larger range of measurement than most conventional measures, decreasing floor and ceiling effects as a result
PROMIS measures have fewer items than conventional measures, thereby decreasing respondent burden. When used as computer adaptive tests, PROMIS measures usually require 4-6 items for precise measurement of health-related constructs
Translations: The assessments are available via PDF in Spanish and can be obtained in other languages by contacting translations@Healthmeasures.net

Cut-Off Scores

Dutch and U.S. General Populations: (Terwee & Roorda, 2023; n = 1002 (Wave 3 – Ability to participate & satisfaction with participation, sample representative of Dutch adult population age ≥ 18, mean age = 51 (17), female = 52%); n = 940 (U.S. general population sample of PROMIS wave 1 data from HealthMeasures Dataverse repository; 35 item Dutch-Flemish PROMIS v2.0 Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities item bank with respondents additionally asked to rate their level of health for the domain based on a single item)

Distribution-based thresholds for PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities

Threshold (based on SD)	Dutch^a	U.S.^a
Within normal limits	>46	>45
Mild	41-46	40-45
Moderate	32-41	30-39
Severe	<32	<30

Anchor-based thresholds for PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities

Threshold (based on self-reported limitations)	Dutch mean T-score (SD)^a
No limitations	56.8 (7.7)
Mild	49.3 (6.4)
Moderate	44.1 (6.7)
Severe	35.7 (7.1)

^aHigher scores represent more ability to participate; SD = Standard Deviation

Normative Data

Dutch and U.S. General Populations: (Terwee & Roorda, 2023)

PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Dutch Reference Values by Age and Gender Compared with the U.S. Reference Population

	Dutch mean T-score (SD)^a	U.S. mean T-score (SD)^a
Total	50.6 (9.5)	50.0 (9.8)
Gender
Male	51.2 (9.5)	49.6 (9.2)
Female	50.1 (9.5)	49.8 (10.1)
Age
18-34	51.5 (9.5)	49.7 (9.3)
35-44	48.4 (9.6)	51.6 (8.3)
45-54	51.1 (9.4)	47.5 (10.8)
55-64	49.4 (9.9)	49.2 (9.8)
65-74	51.4 (8.4)	51.0 (9.8)
75+	52.5 (11.0)	50.0 (8.0)

^aHigher scores represent more ability to participate; SD = Standard Deviation

Internal Consistency

Dutch General Population: (Terwee et al., 2019; n = 1002; mean age = 51 (17); sample representative of Dutch adult population age ≥ 18; mean age = 51 (17); female = 52%; 35 item Dutch-Flemish PROMIS v2.0 Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities item bank; subjects administered full item bank, 8-item short form, standard computerized adaptive test (CAT) with SE=3 and max 12 items, and fixed 8-item CAT)

Excellent: Cronbach’s alpha for full item bank > 0.90* for 92% of the participants
Excellent: Cronbach’s alpha for short form > 0.90* for 85% of the participants
Excellent: Cronbach’s alpha for standard CAT > 0.90* for 92% of the participants
Excellent: Cronbach’s alpha for fixed 8-item CAT > 0.90* for 82% of the participants

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Construct Validity

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: (Katsuri, et. al., 2018, n = 204, 92.6% female, mean age = 40.0 (13.2), recruited from outpatient clinic)

Convergent and discriminant validity of PROMIS10. Values are Spearman correlations.

Outcome Measures	PROMIS Global Physical Health, n = 199	PROMIS Global Mental Health, n = 187
PROMIS ability to participate in social roles CAT	0.74	0.65

Responsiveness

Cardiovascular Disease: (Hahn et al., 2023; n = 272; patients at 12 U.S. sites enrolled in hospital or outpatient clinic prior to planned left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation; PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities v. 2.0)

Change in PROMIS scores were mapped to change in other variables with two sets of anchor change scores calculated: the difference between pre-implant and Month 3 and the difference between Months 3 and 6. Independent Better, No Change, and Worse groups were formed for each anchor change score. The responsiveness indicators (anchors) were:
- Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12): + or – 5 points considered Better or Worse
- EuroQol 5-Dimension, 3 Level (EQ-5D-3L): for each dimension, + or – at least one level considered Better or Worse (+ or – at least 10 points for Visual Analogue Scale)
- PROMIS Global Health items: + or – 1 point considered Better or Worse
- Global Rating of Change: “a lot better” and “a little better” combined into “better”; “a lot worse” and “a little worse” combined into “worse.”

Mean change^a scores from pre-implant to 3 months post-implant for PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities, by change in responsiveness indicator (anchor)

Responsiveness indicator^b	Better	Same	Worse	p^c
KCCQ-12 Social Limitation	6.6 (1.2)	2.2 (3.3)	0.8 (2.8)	0.107
EQ-5D-3L Usual Activities	9.2 (1.6)	3.1 (1.5)	-1.3 (3.2)	0.003
PROMIS Social Activities	8.0 (1.3)	3.4 (1.7)	-1.5 (2.0)	<0.001
Global Rating of Change	9.2 (1.1)	2.7 (1.8)	-2.5 (1.9)	<0.001

Mean change^a scores from 3 to 6 months post-implant for PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities, by change in responsiveness indicator (anchor)

Responsiveness indicator^b	Better	Same	Worse	p^c
KCCQ-12 Social Limitation	2.7 (1.3)	-2.3 (2.4)	-3.0 (1.7)	0.020
EQ-5D-3L Usual Activities	1.2 (2.0)	-0.5 (1.3)	-1.5 (2.2)	0.644
PROMIS Social Activities	4.5 (1.3)	0.9 (1.3)	-5.5 (1.5)	<0.001
Global Rating of Change^d	---	---	---	---

^aMean Change: lease squares mean (standard error).

^bBetter, Same, and Worse categories were defined by changes in the anchor; see above.

^cP value for overall comparison of 3 categories (Better, Same, Worse)

^dGlobal rating of change was not measured at 6 months.

Test/Retest Reliability

Rheumatoid Arthritis: (Bartlett et al, 2015, n = 177, 82% female, 83% White; 24% had an educational attainment of high school or lower; mean age = 55.5 (13.3) years, mean disease duration = 11.6 (9.5) years, version 2.0 computerized adaptive test version of Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities).

Acceptable test-retest reliability for Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities scale (ICC = 0.747)

Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease: (Fisher et al., 2019; n = 73; mean age = 51.9(11.8) years; female = 80.8%; mean disease duration after first non-Reynaud’s symptoms = 7.9 (8.3) years; Promis-29 v2.0).

Poor test-retest reliability for Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Social Role Domain) of PROMIS-29 (ICC = 0.65) Domains.

Internal Consistency

Rheumatoid Arthritis: (Bartlett et al, 2015).

Excellent internal consistency for Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.985*)

Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease (Fisher et al., 2019).

Excellent internal consistency for Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Social Domain) of PROMIS-29: Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.95*

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Criterion Validity (Predictive/Concurrent)

Concurrent validity:

Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease (Fisher et al., 2019).

Excellent concurrent validity between Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Social Role Domain) of PROMIS-29 and Short Form-36 Social Domain (r = 0.75)

Construct Validity

Convergent validity:

Rheumatoid Arthritis: (Bartlett et al, 2015).

Strong correlation between PROMIS-29 Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Scale and Satisfaction with Social Roles & Activities (r = 0.744), Physical Function (r = 0.698), Pain Interfere (r = -0.640), and Fatigue (r = 0.607)
Adequate correlation between PROMIS-29 Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Scale and Pain Intensity (r = -0.509), Sleep Disturb ( r = -0.341), Sleep Impair ( r = -0.461), Depress (r = -0.541), Anxiety (r = -0.514), and Anger (r = -0.431).

Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease (Fisher et al., 2019).

Excellent negative convergent validity between Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Social Role Domain) of PROMIS-29 and Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire Impact Scale (r = -0.61).
Adequate negative convergent validity between Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Social Role Domain) of PROMIS-29 and Patient Global Assessment for Disease Severity, Visual Analogue Scale (r = -0.40).
Poor convergent validity between Ability to Participate in Social Roles & Activities Scale (Social Role Domain) of PROMIS-29 and Leicester Cough Questionnaire Social Domain (r = 0.20).

Internal Consistency

Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: (Huang et al., 2018, n = 1359, 89% White; mean age = 80.7 (6.9) years; age ≥ 80 = 66%; all had at least 2 chronic conditions).

Excellent internal consistency for Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Scale (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.93*)

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Criterion Validity (Predictive/Concurrent)

Concurrent validity:

Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: (Huang et al., 2018).

Strong correlation between PROMIS-29 Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Scale (Social domain) and Physical Function (r = 0.72), and Fatigue domains (r = -0.70).
Adequate correlation between PROMIS-29 Social domain and Anxiety (r = -0.48), Depression (r = -0.57), and Sleep domains (r = -0.36).

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

Fracture Patients: (Houwen, et al., 2023; n = 100; mean age = 55.4 (12.6); female = 60%; operative treatment = 72%; mean time between initial test and follow-up = 64.5 (47.9) days; PROMIS-Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (APSRA) version 2.0)

MDC (n = 91) for PROMIS-CAT ASPRA = 1.7 points on T-score metric

Minimally Clinically Important Difference (MCID)

Fracture Patients: (Houwen, et al., 2023)

MCID (n = 91, calculated using the logistic regression method) for PROMIS-CAT ASPRA = 3.2 (95% CI: 0.36; 6.49)

Normative Data

Fracture Patients: (Houwen, et al., 2023)

Mean Change of PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (APSRA) Specified to Anchor Response

Answer on anchor question	n	Mean PROMIS-APSRA Change Score (SD)
Much improved	5	10.2 (15.5)
Improved	25	12.0 (4.9)
Slightly improved	19	1.8 (3.4)
No difference	31	0.9 (6.4)
Slightly worse	7	-3.9 (1.8)
Worse	4	-9.3 (5.8)
Much worse	0	--

Normative Data

Breast Cancer: (Cai et al., 2021; n = 633; mean age = 48.07 (9.97); age range = 23-76; simplified Chinese translation of PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities 4-item Short Form: Ability-SF4)

Average T scores for Ability-SF4 = 51.49 (9.86)

Internal Consistency

Diverse Cancer: (Hahn et al., 2016; n = 5,301, 40% were age 65 or older; 42% were non-Hispanic White; 36% had an educational attainment of High school or lower; all within 6-13 months of first diagnosis of seven different cancer types; 10-item short form for Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities: Ability-SF10)

Excellent internal consistency for Ability-SF10 subscale: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.98*

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Excellent: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.88

Construct Validity

Convergent validity:

Diverse Cancer: (Hahn et al., 2016).

Excellent convergent validity between Ability-SF10 and PROMIS-29 Physical Function (r = 0.765)
Excellent negative convergent validity between Ability-SF10 and PROMIS-29 scales:
- Emotional Distress-Anxiety (r = -0.614)
- Emotional Distress-Depression (r = -0.635)
- Fatigue (r = -0.784)
- Pain Interference (r = -0.679)
Adequate negative convergent validity between Ability-SF10 and PROMIS-29 Sleep Disturbance scale (r = -0.495)

Breast Cancer: (Cai et al., 2021)

Adequate convergent validity between Ability-SF4 and PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form (r = 0.54, p < 0.001)
Adequate convergent validity between Ability-SF4 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (r = 0.359, p < 0.001)

Discriminant validity:

Breast Cancer: (Cai et al., 2021)

Significant (p < 0.001) known groups validity of PROMIS ability to participate in social roles and activities short form in distinguishing between employed (mean = 49.67 (12.20)) vs. unemployed (mean = 50.35 (8.14)) persons
Excellent discriminant validity between Ability-SF4 and PROMIS Anxiety Short Form (r = 0.08, p = 0.045)

Floor/Ceiling Effects

Diverse Cancer : (Hahn et al., 2016).

Adequate floor effects for all 10 Ability-SF10 items (<20%).
Poor ceiling effects for all 10 Ability-SF10 items (>20%).

Breast Cancer: (Cai et al., 2021)

Adequate floor (<5%) and ceiling (<4%) effects for all 4 items of PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities short form

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Mixed Populations: (Hahn et al., 2014; n = 2,208 English-speaking, 59.7% female, 49.5% age 60 or older; n = 644 Spanish, 63% female, 2% age 60 or older).

Excellent precision for English Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities scale with 93.1% of respondents having a SEM ≤ 3.0
Excellent precision for Spanish Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities scale with 90.2% of respondents having a SEM ≤ 3.0

Responsiveness

Mixed Populations: (Tamminga et al., 2020; n = 209; mean age = 58 (15); age range = 21-85; male = 100 (48%); outpatients receiving multi-disciplinary rehabilitation in a large rehabilitation center; 8-item short form of PROMIS—Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (APS))

PROMIS-APS T-scores¹ at admission (T0) and discharge (T1)

Condition (n)	T0 Mean	T1 Mean	p	Effect size
Total sample (209)	42.4 (7.2)	43.6 (7.2)	0.004	0.16
Brain Injury (113)	42.7 (6.7)	44.0 (7.5)	0.016	0.17
Spinal cord & nerve injury (26)	42.5 (8.1)	42.5 (6.8)	0.987	NA²
Neuromuscular disorder (23)	42.6 (9.8)	42.9 (7.6)	0.812	NA²
Amputation (4)	50.1 (4.3)	45.3 (6.1)	0.273	NA²
Musculoskeletal condition (32)	40.6 (5.7)	42.8 (6.4)	0.012	0.37
Heart or lung disease (11)	41.5 (7.5)	45.3 (7.1)	0.139	NA²

¹Score range = 0-100; higher scores means better able to participate.

²Not analyzed as sample size too small to calculate effect size.

Small Change: Effect size < 0.2 for Total sample (0.16) and Brain Injury (0.17)
Moderate Change: Effect size ≥ 0.2 and < 0.5 for Musculoskeletal condition (0.37)

Normative Data

Kidney Transplant Recipients: (Tang, et. al., 2019, n = 77, 58% male, mean age = 50.6 (17.0) years, adults who received a kidney transplant >30 days pre-enrollment )

Distribution of PROMIS scores: Ability to participate in social roles and activities

	n	Mean	SD	Median	25%	75%	Min	Max
PROMIS-29	168	52.97	9.26	51.6	44.8	64.1	29.0	64.1
PROMIS-57	167	52.46	9.73	52.7	44.0	60.2	25.9	65.4

Test/Retest Reliability

Kidney Transplant Recipients: (Tang, et. al., 2019)

Acceptable for PROMIS-29 APSRA (n = 168): ICC = 0.70
Acceptable for PROMIS-57 APSRA (n = 167): ICC = 0.76

Internal Consistency

Kidney Transplant Recipients: (Tang et al, 2019)

Excellent for PROMIS-29 APSRA (n = 168): α = 0.95*
Excellent for PROMIS-57 APSRA (n = 167): α = 0.97*

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Construct Validity

Convergent validity:

Kidney Transplant Recipients: (Tang et al, 2019)

Excellent convergent validity between PROMIS-57 APSRA domain and legacy Social Difficulties Inventory (r = −0.700 (95% CI: −0.774 to −0.606))
Excellent convergent validity between PROMIS-29 APSRA domain and legacy Social Difficulties Inventory (r = −0.695 (95% CI: −0.771 to −0.601))

Floor/Ceiling Effects

Kidney Transplant Recipients: (Tang, et. al., 2019)

PROMIS-57 APSRA

Floor: 1%
Ceiling: 23%

PROMIS-29 APSRA

Floor = 1%
Ceiling = 33%

Bibliography

Bartlett, S. J., Orbai, A. M., Duncan, T., DeLeon, E., Ruffing, V., Clegg-Smith, K., & Bingham, C. O., 3rd (2015). Reliability and Validity of Selected PROMIS Measures in People with Rheumatoid Arthritis. PloS one, 10(9), e0138543. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138543

Cai, T., Huang, Q., Wu, F., & Yuan, C. (2021). Psychometric evaluations of the PROMIS social function short forms in Chinese patients with breast cancer. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19, 149. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01788-8.

Hahn, E. A., DeWalt, D. A., Bode, R. K., Garcia, S. F., DeVellis, R. F., Correia, H., Cella, D., & PROMIS Cooperative Group (2014). New English and Spanish social health measures will facilitate evaluating health determinants. Health psychology: official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 33(5), 490–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000055

Hahn, E. A., Kallen, M. A., Jensen, R. E., Potosky, A. L., Moinpour, C. M., Ramirez, M., Cella, D., & Teresi, J. A. (2016). Measuring social function in diverse cancer populations: Evaluation of measurement equivalence of the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities short form. Psychological test and assessment modeling, 58(2), 403–421.

Hahn, E. A. et al. (2023). PROMIS: Physical, Mental and Social Health Outcomes Improve From Before to Early After LVAD Implant: Findings From the Mechanical Circulatory Support: Measures of Adjustment and Quality of Life (MCS A-QOL) Study. Journal of Cardiac Failure, 29(10), 1398-1411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2023.03.013

Houwen, T., Theeuwes, H. P., Verhofstad, M. H. J., de Jongh, M. A. C. (2023). From numbers to meaningful change: Minimal important change by using PROMIS in a cohort of fracture patients. Injury, 54, 110882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2023.110882.

Huang, W., Rose, A. J., Bayliss, E., Baseman, L., Butcher, E., Garcia, R. E., & Edelen, M. O. (2019). Adapting summary scores for the PROMIS-29 v2.0 for use among older adults with multiple chronic conditions. Quality of life research: an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 28(1), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1988-z

Fisher, C. J., Namas, R., Seelman, D., Jaafar, S., Homer, K., Wilhalme, H., Young, A., Nagaraja, V., White, E. S., Schiopu, E., Flaherty, K., & Khanna, D. (2019). Reliability, construct validity and responsiveness to change of the PROMIS-29 in systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease. Clinical and experimental rheumatology, 37 Suppl 119(4), 49–56.

Kasturi, S., Szymonifka, J., Burket, J. C., Berman, J. R., Kirou, K. A., Levine, A. B., Sammaritano, L.R., Mandl, L.A. (2018). Feasibility, Validity, and Reliability of the 10-item Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health Short Form in Outpatients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. The Journal of Rheumatology, 45(3), 397 404. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.170590

Tamminga, S. J., van Vree, F. M., Volker, G., Roorda, L. D., Terwee, C. B., Goosens, P. H., & Vliet Vlieland, T. P. M. (2020). Changes in the ability to participate in and satisfaction with social roles and activities in patients in outpatient rehabilitation. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 4:73. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00236-3.

Tang, E., Ekundayo, O., Peipert, J. D., Edwards, N., Bansal, A., Richardson, C., Bartlett, S.J., Howell, D., Li, M., Cella, D., Novak, M., Mucsi, I. (2019). Validation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-57 and -29 item short forms among kidney transplant recipients. Quality of Life Research, 28(3), 815-827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2058-2

Terwee, C. B., Crins, M. H. P., Boers, M., de Vet, H. C. W., & Roorda, L. D. (2019). Validation of two PROMIS item banks for measuring social participation in the Dutch general population. Quality of Life Research, 28, 211-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1995-0.

Terwee, C.B. & Roorda, L.D. (2023). Country-specific reference values for PROMIS pain, physical function and participation measures compared to U.S. reference values. Annals of Medicine, 55(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2149849

Last Updated

Purpose

Link to Instrument

Area of Assessment

Assessment Type

Cost

Actual Cost

Cost Description

Number of Items

Required Training

Instrument Reviewers

ICF Domain

Measurement Domain

Considerations

Cut-Off Scores

Normative Data

Internal Consistency

Construct Validity

Responsiveness

Test/Retest Reliability

Internal Consistency

Criterion Validity (Predictive/Concurrent)

Construct Validity

Internal Consistency

Criterion Validity (Predictive/Concurrent)

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

Minimally Clinically Important Difference (MCID)

Normative Data

Normative Data

Internal Consistency

Construct Validity

Floor/Ceiling Effects

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Responsiveness

Normative Data

Test/Retest Reliability

Internal Consistency

Construct Validity

Floor/Ceiling Effects

Bibliography

Leicester Cough Questionna...

Minnesota Living with Hear...

Buss-Durkee Hostility Inve...