Relationships Between PROMIS and Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) Scores in the MARS Cohort at 10-Year Follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to evaluate the impact of musculoskeletal conditions and their treatment on patients' quality of life, but they have limitations, such as high responder burden and floor and ceiling effects. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to address these issues but needs to be further evaluated in comparison with legacy PROMs. The goals of this study were to evaluate the floor and ceiling effects of, the correlations between, and the predictive ability of PROMIS scores compared with traditional legacy measures at 10-year follow-up in a cohort who underwent revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS: A total of 203 patients (88.7% White; 51.7% female) who underwent revision ACL reconstruction completed the PROMIS via computer adaptive tests as well as legacy PROMs at the cross-sectional, 10-year follow-up of the longitudinal MARS cohort study (MARS cohort n = 1,234). Floor and ceiling effects and Spearman rho correlations between PROMIS and legacy measures are reported. Linear regression with quadratic terms were used to develop and evaluate conversion equations to predict legacy scores from the PROMIS. RESULTS: No floor or ceiling effects were reported for the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) domain, whereas a floor effect was found for 37.9% of the participants for the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) domain, and a ceiling effect was found for 34.0% of the participants for the PROMIS Physical Mobility (PM) domain. PROMIS domains correlated moderately with the International Knee Documentation Committee total subjective score (absolute value of rho [|ρ|] = 0.68 to 0.74), fairly to moderately with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores (|ρ| = 0.52 to 0.67), and fairly with the Marx Activity Rating Scale (|ρ| = 0.35 to 0.44). None of the legacy-measure scores were accurately predicted by the PROMIS scores. CONCLUSIONS: The PROMIS PF domain has value in assessing patients 10 years after revision ACL reconstruction. Because of floor and ceiling effects, using the PI and PM domains may not allow for precision when measuring long-term changes in pain and mobility. Although the PROMIS measures correlated with the legacy measures, with effect sizes ranging from fair to moderate, the legacy scores were not accurately predicted by the PROMIS. The results suggest that knee-specific legacy measures should not be eliminated from long-term follow-up when the goal is to capture the specific knee-related information that they provide. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".