The positive mental health instrument: development and validation of a culturally relevant scale in a multi-ethnic asian population

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Instruments to measure mental health and well-being are largely developed and often used within Western populations and this compromises their validity in other cultures. A previous qualitative study in Singapore demonstrated the relevance of spiritual and religious practices to mental health, a dimension currently not included in exiting multi-dimensional measures. The objective of this study was to develop a self-administered measure that covers all key and culturally appropriate domains of mental health, which can be applied to compare levels of mental health across different age, gender and ethnic groups. We present the item reduction and validation of the Positive Mental Health (PMH) instrument in a community-based adult sample in Singapore.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Surveys were conducted among adult (21-65 years) residents belonging to Chinese, Malay and Indian ethnicities. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA, CFA) were conducted and items were reduced using item response theory tests (IRT). The final version of the PMH instrument was tested for internal consistency and criterion validity. Items were tested for differential item functioning (DIF) to check if items functioned in the same way across all subgroups. <b>Results: </b>EFA and CFA identified six first-order factor structure (General coping, Personal growth and autonomy, Spirituality, Interpersonal skills, Emotional support, and Global affect) under one higher-order dimension of Positive Mental Health (RMSEA = 0.05, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.96). A 47-item self-administered multi-dimensional instrument with a six-point Likert response scale was constructed. The slope estimates and strength of the relation to the theta for all items in each six PMH subscales were high (range:1.39 to 5.69), suggesting good discrimination properties. The threshold estimates for the instrument ranged from -3.45 to 1.61 indicating that the instrument covers entire spectrums for the six dimensions. The instrument demonstrated high internal consistency and had significant and expected correlations with other well-being measures. Results confirmed absence of DIF.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The PMH instrument is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used to measure and compare level of mental health across different age, gender and ethnic groups in Singapore.</p

Item Response Theory analysis of the Autonomy over Tobacco Scale (AUTOS)

INTRODUCTION: The Autonomy over Tobacco Scale (AUTOS) is composed of 12-symptoms of nicotine dependence. While it has demonstrated excellent reliability and validity, several psychometric properties have yet to be investigated. We aimed to determine (1) whether items functioned differently across demographic groups, (2) the likelihood that individual symptoms would be endorsed by smokers at different levels of diminished autonomy, and (3) the degree of information provided by each item and the reliability of the full AUTOS across the range of diminished autonomy. METHODS: Data for this study come from two convenience samples of American adult current smokers (n=777; 69% female; 88% white; Mage=34 years, range: 18-78), of whom 66% were daily smokers (Mcigarettes/smoking day=10.1, range: \u3c 1-70). Participants completed the AUTOS online as part of a research study about the experiences people have when they smoke. RESULTS: After p value correction, items remained invariant across sex and minority status, while two items functioned differently according to age, with minimal impact on the total AUTOS score. Discriminative power of the items was high. The greatest amount of information is provided at just under one-half SD above the mean and the least at the extremes of diminished autonomy. The AUTOS maintains acceptable reliability ( \u3e 0.70) across the range of diminished autonomy within which more than 95% of smokers\u27 scores could be anticipated to fall. CONCLUSION: The AUTOS is a versatile and psychometrically sound instrument for measuring the loss of autonomy over tobacco use

Support for the Reliability and Validity of the National Institutes of Health Impact Stratification Score in a Sample of Active-Duty U.S. Military Personnel with Low Back Pain.

ObjectiveEvaluate the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) measure of low back pain impact that assesses physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity.DesignSecondary analyses of a prospective comparative effectiveness trial of active-duty military personnel with low back pain.SettingA Naval hospital at a military training site (Pensacola, Florida) and two military medical centers: 1) Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (Bethesda, Maryland); and 2) San Diego Naval Medical Center.SubjectsThe 749 active-duty military personnel had an average age of 31 years, 76% were male, and 67% were white.MethodsParticipants completed questionnaires at baseline, 6 weeks later, and 12 weeks later. Measures included the ISS, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), PROMIS-29 v1.0 satisfaction with social role participation scale, and single-item ratings of average pain, feeling bothered by low back pain in the past week, and a rating of change in low back pain.ResultsInternal consistency reliability for the ISS was 0.92-0.93 at the three time points. The ISS correlated 0.75 to 0.84 with the RMDQ, 0.51 to 0.78 with the single-item ratings, and -0.64 to -0.71 with satisfaction with social role participation. The ISS was responsive to change on the three single items. The area under the curve for the ISS predicting improvement on the rating of change from baseline to 6 weeks later was 0.83.ConclusionsThis study provides support for the reliability and validity of the ISS as a patient-reported summary measure for acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain. The ISS is a useful indicator of low back impact

Crosswalking the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity Scores to the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index.

ObjectiveTo link scores from 2 condition-specific measures for chronic low back pain (CLBP), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), to Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity scores.DesignOrdinary least squares regression analyses of existing data to link the PROMIS scores with the ODI and RMDQ.SettingNot applicable.ParticipantsSamples of adults with CLBP (N=2279) obtained from the Center for Excellence in Research for Complementary and Integrative Health (CERC) Study (n=1677), the Assessment of Chiropractic Treatment for Low Back Pain and Smoking Cessation in Military Active Duty Personnel (ACT) (n=384), and the pain subsample of the PROMIS 1 Wave 2 Pain and Depression study (PROMIS 1 W2) (n=218).InterventionsNot applicable.Main outcome measuresPROMIS physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity (CERC, ACT, and PROMIS 1 W2), ODI (CERC and PROMIS 1 W2), and RMDQ (ACT and PROMIS 1 W2).ResultsIn predicting PROMIS scores, the ODI model R2 values ranged from 0.26-0.56 and the RMDQ model R2 values ranged from 0.13-0.50. ODI and RMDQ models were the least precise in predicting the PROMIS pain intensity score (R2 value range, 0.13-0.41) relative to the other PROMIS scores. Models with the 3 PROMIS scores as predictors yielded R2 values ranging from 0.64-0.68 and 0.46-0.58 for the ODI and RMDQ, respectively. Models using combined data from 2 studies (ie, PROMIS 1 W2 and ACT, or PROMIS 1 W2 and CERC) tended to be more precise than models using only a single study sample.ConclusionsModel results reported here can be used to translate PROMIS physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity scores to and from the ODI and RMDQ. The empirical linkages can facilitate comparisons across CLBP interventions and broaden interpretation of study results

Crosswalking the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity Scores to the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index.

ObjectiveTo link scores from 2 condition-specific measures for chronic low back pain (CLBP), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), to Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity scores.DesignOrdinary least squares regression analyses of existing data to link the PROMIS scores with the ODI and RMDQ.SettingNot applicable.ParticipantsSamples of adults with CLBP (N=2279) obtained from the Center for Excellence in Research for Complementary and Integrative Health (CERC) Study (n=1677), the Assessment of Chiropractic Treatment for Low Back Pain and Smoking Cessation in Military Active Duty Personnel (ACT) (n=384), and the pain subsample of the PROMIS 1 Wave 2 Pain and Depression study (PROMIS 1 W2) (n=218).InterventionsNot applicable.Main outcome measuresPROMIS physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity (CERC, ACT, and PROMIS 1 W2), ODI (CERC and PROMIS 1 W2), and RMDQ (ACT and PROMIS 1 W2).ResultsIn predicting PROMIS scores, the ODI model R2 values ranged from 0.26-0.56 and the RMDQ model R2 values ranged from 0.13-0.50. ODI and RMDQ models were the least precise in predicting the PROMIS pain intensity score (R2 value range, 0.13-0.41) relative to the other PROMIS scores. Models with the 3 PROMIS scores as predictors yielded R2 values ranging from 0.64-0.68 and 0.46-0.58 for the ODI and RMDQ, respectively. Models using combined data from 2 studies (ie, PROMIS 1 W2 and ACT, or PROMIS 1 W2 and CERC) tended to be more precise than models using only a single study sample.ConclusionsModel results reported here can be used to translate PROMIS physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity scores to and from the ODI and RMDQ. The empirical linkages can facilitate comparisons across CLBP interventions and broaden interpretation of study results

Unpacking the impact of chronic pain as measured by the impact stratification score

BackgroundIn 2014, the National Institute of Health Pain Consortium's research task force on research standards for chronic low back pain (CLBP) proposed a measure that could be used to stratify patients by the impact CLBP has on their lives, namely the Impact Stratification Score (ISS). This study examines the dimensionality of the ISS and support for its single total score, and evaluates its overall psychometric properties.MethodsThe sample included 1677 chiropractic patients being treated for CLBP and chronic neck pain, had an average age of 49, 71% female, and 90% White. Study participants completed the PROMIS-29 v2.1 profile survey that contains the 9 ISS items. The ISS was evaluated using item-total correlations, Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis (i.e., correlated factors and bifactor models), and item response theory (IRT). Reliability indices and item properties were evaluated from bifactor and IRT models, respectively.ResultsItem-total correlations were high (0.64-0.84) with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.93. Eigenvalues suggested the possibility of two factors corresponding to physical function and pain interference/intensity. Bifactor model results indicated that data were essentially unidimensional, primarily reflecting one general construct (i.e., impact) and that after accounting for 'impact' very little reliable variance remained in the two group factors. General impact scores were reliable (omegaH = .73). IRT models showed that items were strong indicators of impact and provided information across a wide range of the impact continuum and offer the possibility of a shorter 8-item ISS. Finally, it appears that different aspects of pain interference occur prior to losses in physical function.ConclusionsThis study presents evidence that the ISS is sufficiently unidimensional, covers a range of chronic pain impact and is a reliable measure. Insights are obtained into the sequence of chronic pain impacts on patients' lives

Support for a Single Underlying Dimension of Self-Reported Health in a Sample of Adults with Low Back Pain in the United States

Abstract: There is increasing interest in measuring “whole person” health and deriving an overall summary score. Underlying physical and mental health dimensions have been found consistently in prior studies of self-reported health, but it is unclear whether a single underlying health factor is supported across health domains. We examine the dimensionality of nine domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®)-29 + 2 profile measure, the PROMIS social isolation scale, the Personal Wellbeing Index, and the EQ-5D-5L preference score in a sample of 1256 adults with back pain in the United States: mean age was 55 (range 18–94), 52% female, 74% non-Hispanic White, 61% were married or living with a spouse, and the highest level of education completed for 35% of the sample was a high school degree or general education diploma. The sample reported substantially more pain intensity, pain interference, and worse physical function than the U.S. general population. Product-moment correlations among the measures ranged from 0.25 to 0.83 (median correlation = 0.52). A bifactor model showed that a general health factor accounted for most of the covariation among measures, but physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity loaded slightly more on the physical health group factor than on the general health factor. The study provides some support for combining multiple aspects of self-reported health into an overall indicator of whole-person health

Analyses of Cross-Sectional Data to Link the PEG With the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement and Information System (PROMIS) Global Physical Health Scale.

It is challenging to synthesize findings across studies of pain impact. This study develops a link to estimate the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health measure from the 3-item Pain intensity, interference with Enjoyment of life, interference with General activity (PEG) scale. The PROMIS and PEG items were administered to 795 adults (average age&nbsp;=&nbsp;51; 54% female, 79% White). We estimated correlations among the PEG and PROMIS items and conducted factor analysis to identify the best subset of PROMIS items for linking to the PEG. An item response theory graded response model was estimated to link the PEG with the 4-item PROMIS global physical health scale. A categorical single-factor model and a bifactor model provided support for a single dimension for the PEG and PROMIS global physical health items. The product-moment correlation between estimated PROMIS global physical health scale from the PEG and the actual global physical health score was .74. The mean difference between estimated PROMIS global physical health scale score from the PEG and the observed global physical health score was less than a T-score point. This study makes it possible to estimate the average global physical health for group-level comparisons in research that includes the PEG. PERSPECTIVE: This article describes an empirical link of the PEG to the PROMIS global physical health scale that makes it possible to estimate the average global physical health in studies that include the PEG. This link can facilitate comparisons among studies that have not administered the PEG or the PROMIS global health scale

Mapping of the PROMIS global health measure to the PROPr in the United States

Abstract: Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement and Information System (PROMIS®) global health items (global-10) yield physical and mental health scale scores and the PROMIS-Preference (PROPr) scoring system estimated from PROMIS domain scores (e.g., PROMIS-29 + 2) produces a single score anchored by 0 (dead or as bad as being dead) to 1 (full health). A link between the PROMIS global-10 and the PROPr is needed. Methods: The PROMIS-29 + 2 and the PROMIS global-10 were administered to 4102 adults in the Ipsos KnowledgePanel in 2022. The median age was 52 (range 18–94), 50% were female, 70% were non-Hispanic White, and 64% were married or living with a partner. The highest level of education completed for 26% of the sample was a high school degree or general education diploma and 44% worked full-time. We estimated correlations of the PROPr with the PROMIS global health items and the global physical and mental health scales. We examined the adjusted R2 and estimated correlations between predicted and observed PROPr scores. Results: Product-moment correlations between the PROMIS global health items and the PROPr ranged from 0.50 to 0.63. The PROMIS global physical health and mental health scale scores correlated 0.74 and 0.60, respectively, with the PROPr. The adjusted R2 in the regression of the PROPr on the PROMIS global health items was 64%. The equated PROPr preference scores correlated (product-moment) 0.80 (n = 4043; p &lt; 0.0001) with the observed PROPr preference scores, and the intra-class correlation (two-way random effects model) was 0.80. The normalized mean absolute error (NMAE) was 0.45 (SD = 0.43). The adjusted R2 in the OLS regression of the PROPr on the PROMIS global health scales was 59%. The equated PROPr preference scores correlated (product-moment) was 0.77 (n = 4046; p &lt; 0.0001) with the observed PROPr preference scores, and the intra-class correlation was 0.77. The NMAE was 0.49 (SD = 0.45). Conclusions: Regression equations provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the PROPr preference-based score from the PROMIS global health items or scales for group-level comparisons. These estimates facilitate cost-effectiveness research and meta-analyses. The estimated PROPr scores are not accurate enough for individual-level applications. Future evaluations of the prediction equations are needed