Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Adult Domain Framework Using Item Response Theory Scores

Published in: Medical Care, v. 53, no. 10, Oct. 2015, p. 894-900

Posted on RAND.org on January 05, 2016

by Adam Carle, William T. Riley, Ron D. Hays, David Cella

Read More

Access further information on this document at Medical Care

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND: To guide measure development, National Institutes of Health-supported Patient reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) investigators developed a hierarchical domain framework. The framework specifies health domains at multiple levels. The initial PROMIS domain framework specified that physical function and symptoms such as Pain and Fatigue indicate Physical Health (PH); Depression, Anxiety, and Anger indicate Mental Health (MH); and Social Role Performance and Social Satisfaction indicate Social Health (SH). We used confirmatory factor analyses to evaluate the fit of the hypothesized framework to data collected from a large sample. METHODS: We used data (n=14,098) from PROMIS's wave 1 field test and estimated domain scores using the PROMIS item response theory parameters. We then used confirmatory factor analyses to test whether the domains corresponded to the PROMIS domain framework as expected. RESULTS: A model corresponding to the domain framework did not provide ideal fit [root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.13; comparative fit index (CFI)=0.92; Tucker Lewis Index (TLI)=0.88; standardized root mean square residual (SRMR)=0.09]. On the basis of modification indices and exploratory factor analyses, we allowed Fatigue to load on both PH and MH. This model fit the data acceptably (RMSEA=0.08; CFI=0.97; TLI=0.96; SRMR=0.03). DISCUSSION: Our findings generally support the PROMIS domain framework. Allowing Fatigue to load on both PH and MH improved fit considerably.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.