Psychometric properties of the Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Sleep Disturbance and Sleep‐Related Impairment item banks in adolescents

Abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Psychometric properties and CAT performance of the PROMIS pediatric sleep disturbance, sleep-related impairment, and fatigue item banks in Dutch children and adolescents.

“…In the CATs, the item was selected in 46.1% of the cases. The PROMIS pediatric SRI performed comparable to the previously validated adult version in adolescents (van Kooten et al, 2020). The misfit item w026c was in the original adult item bank part of the waking symptoms factor, which was previously considered conceptually problematic since waking up difficulties are common in adolescents due to the development of the circadian rhythm (Hagenauer et al, 2009), and therefore the waking-up factor was not added to the Dutch adult SRI measure for adolescents and not tested with IRT in adolescents (van Kooten et al, 2018, 2016).…”

“…However, the fit indices we found, were similar to those reported in U.S. children with diverse chronic illnesses and neurodevelopmental disorders (Meltzer et al, 2020), namely CFA ≥ .90 but below the recommended CFI > .95 for adequate fit (Reeve et al, 2007). The pediatric version had better indices compared to the adult SD version adapted for Dutch adolescents (pediatric CFI ≥ .90 vs. adults CFI = .80; van Kooten et al, 2020). These findings indicate that the construct of SD in the pediatric population entails multiple domains.…”

“…For example, insomnia subtype differs from adults in teenage years (Blanken et al, 2019). As suggested by van Kooten et al (2020), additional content might need to be developed to capture all domains of SD in children and adolescents, and more research is needed to further explore this multidimensionality.…”

“…The pediatric and adult versions of the SD and SRI overlap but differ for several items; see . The adult version of the SRI item bank also showed adequate content and structural validity (comparative fit index [CFI] = .96, Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] = .94, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = .15, and standardized root mean square residual [SRMR] = .06) in Dutch adolescents (11–19 years old), but the SD was not satisfactory (CFI = .80, TLI = .78, RMSEA = .14, SRMR = .11; van Kooten et al, 2016, 2018, 2020). The original pediatric U.S. item banks were translated into Dutch–Flemish in 2017 by the Dutch–Flemish PROMIS group using standard PROMIS translation methodology as described by Haverman et al (2016).…”

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a web-based routine assessment with integrated recommendations for action for depression and anxiety (RehaCAT+): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial for patients with elevated depressive symptoms in rehabilitation facilities

“…The scale comprises 27 items and is rated on a response scale from 1 (not at all or never) to 5 (very much or always). It is a validated instrument and has good psychometric properties with α>0.90 97 98…”