Performance of PROMIS Instruments in Patients With Shoulder Instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shoulder instability is a relatively common condition occurring in 2% of the population. PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System) was developed by the National Institutes of Health in an effort to advance patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments by developing question banks for major health domains. PURPOSE: To compare PROMIS instruments to current PRO instruments in patients who would be undergoing operative intervention for recurrent shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A total of 74 patients with a primary diagnosis of shoulder instability who would be undergoing surgery were asked to fill out the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder assessment form (ASES), Marx shoulder activity scale (Marx), Short Form-36 Health Survey Physical Function subscale (SF-36 PF), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), PROMIS physical function computer adaptive test (PF CAT), and PROMIS upper extremity item bank (UE). Correlation between PRO instruments was defined as excellent (>0.7), excellent-good (0.61-0.7), good (0.4-0.6), and poor (0.2-0.3). RESULTS: Utilization of the PROMIS UE demonstrated excellent correlation with the SF-36 PF ( r = 0.78, P < .01) and ASES ( r = 0.71, P < .01); there was excellent-good correlation with the EQ-5D ( r = 0.66, P < .01), WOSI ( r = 0.63, P < .01), and PROMIS PF CAT ( r = 0.63, P < .01). Utilization of the PROMIS PF CAT demonstrated excellent correlation with the SF-36 PF ( r = 0.72, P < .01); there was excellent-good correlation with the ASES ( r = 0.67, P < .01) and PROMIS UE ( r = 0.63, P < .01). When utilizing the PROMIS UE, ceiling effects were present in 28.6% of patients aged 18 to 21 years. Patients, on average, answered 4.6 ± 1.8 questions utilizing the PROMIS PF CAT. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS UE and PROMIS PF CAT demonstrated good to excellent correlation with common shoulder and upper extremity PRO instruments as well as the SF-36 PF in patients with shoulder instability. In patients aged ≤21 years, there were significant ceiling effects utilizing the PROMIS UE. While the PROMIS PF CAT appears appropriate for use in adults of any age, our findings demonstrate that the PROMIS UE has significant ceiling effects in patients with shoulder instability who are ≤21 years old, and we do not recommend use of the PROMIS UE in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".