• Suzanne Ameringer, R K Elswick, Victoria Menzies, Jo Lynne Robins, Angela Starkweather, Jeanne Walter, Amanda Elswick Gentry, and Nancy Jallo.
• Suzanne Ameringer, PhD, RN, is Associate Professor; R. K. Elswick Jr., PhD, is Professor; Victoria Menzies, PhD, RN, is Associate Professor; Jo Lynne Robins, PhD, RN, is Associate Professor; Angela Starkweather, PhD, RN, is Associate Professor; Jeanne Walter, PhD, RN, is Clinical Assistant Professor; Amanda Elswick Gentry, BA, is Graduate Student; and Nancy Jallo, PhD, RN, is Associate Professor, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.
• Nurs Res. 2016 Jul 1; 65 (4): 279-89.

BackgroundThe need for reliable, valid tools to measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is critical both for research and for evaluating treatment effects in practice. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Fatigue-Short Form v1.0-Fatigue 7a (PROMIS F-SF) has had limited psychometric evaluation in various populations.ObjectivesThe aim of the study is to examine psychometric properties of PROMIS F-SF item responses across various populations.MethodsData from five studies with common data elements were used in this secondary analysis. Samples from patients with fibromyalgia, sickle cell disease, cardiometabolic risk, pregnancy, and healthy controls were used. Reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha. Dimensionality was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis. Concurrent validity was evaluated by examining Pearson's correlations between scores from the PROMIS F-SF, the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form, and the Brief Fatigue Inventory. Discriminant validity was evaluated by examining Pearson's correlations between scores on the PROMIS F-SF and measures of stress and depressive symptoms. Known groups validity was assessed by comparing PROMIS F-SF scores in the clinical samples to healthy controls.ResultsReliability of PROMIS F-SF scores was adequate across samples, ranging from .72 in the pregnancy sample to .88 in healthy controls. Unidimensionality was supported in each sample. Concurrent validity was strong; across the groups, correlations with scores on the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form and Brief Fatigue Inventory ranged from .60 to .85. Correlations of the PROMIS F-SF with measures of stress and depressive mood were moderate to strong, ranging from .37 to .64. PROMIS F-SF scores were significantly higher in clinical samples compared to healthy controls.DiscussionReliability and validity of the PROMIS F-SF were acceptable. The PROMIS F-SF is a suitable measure of fatigue across the four diverse clinical populations included in the analysis.

19 keywords...

hide…