Predicting the DRAM mZDI using the PROMIS anxiety and depression

Spine

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 179-183

  Hung, Man ^a   Stuart, Ami ^a   Cheng, Christine ^a   Hon, Shirley D ^b   Spiker, Ryan ^a   Lawrence, Brandon ^a   Neese, Ashley ^a   Brodke, Darrel S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (United States)

Author keywords

Anxiety; Depression; DRAM; mZDI; Patient reported outcomes; PROMIS

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANXIETY DISORDER; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DEPRESSION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODIFIED ZUNG DEPRESSION INDEX; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASUREMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SELF REPORT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ANXIETY; PSYCHOLOGICAL RATING SCALE; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADULT; AGED; ANXIETY; DEPRESSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHIATRIC STATUS RATING SCALES; PSYCHOMETRICS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84926168196     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000706     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Main CJ. The Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ). J Psychosom Res 1983;27:503-14.
2. Main CJ, Waddell G. The detection of psychological abnormality in chronic low back pain using four simple scales. Curr Concepts Pain 1984;2:10-5.
3. Zung WW. A self-rating depression scale. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1965;12:63-70.
4. Daubs MD, Patel AA, Willick SE, et al. Clinical impression versus standardized questionnaire: the spinal surgeon's ability to assess psychological distress. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010;92:2878-83.
5. Greenough CG, Fraser RD. Comparison of eight psychometric instruments in unselected patients with back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1991;16:1068-74.
6. Main CJ, Wood PL, Hollis S, et al. The distress and risk assessment method: a simple patient classification to identify distress and evaluate the risk of poor outcome. Spine 1992;17:42-52.
7. Melloh M, Elfering A, Käser A, et al. Depression impacts the course of recovery in patients with acute low-back pain. Behav Med 2013;39:80-9.
8. Licciardone JC, Gatchel RJ, Kearns CM, et al. Depression, somatization, and somatic dysfunction in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: results from the OSTEOPATHIC trial. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2012;112:783-91.
9. Gershon R, Rothrock NE, Hanrahan RT, et al. The development of a clinical outcomes survey research application: assessment center. Qual Life Res 2010;19:677-85.
10. Gershon RC, Rothrock N, Hanrahan R, et al. The use of PROMIS and assessment center to deliver patient-reported outcome measures in clinical research. J Appl Meas 2010;11:304.
11. De Walt DA, Rothrock N, Yount S, et al. Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review. Med Care 2007;45 (5 suppl 1):S12.
12. Pilkonis PA, Choi SW, Reise SP, et al. Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment 2011;18:263-83.
13. Hung M, Clegg DO, Greene T, et al. Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function item bank in orthopaedic patients. J Orthop Res 2011;29:947-53.
14. Hung M, Clegg DO, Greene T, et al. A lower extremity physical function computerized adaptive testing instrument for orthopaedic patients. Foot Ankle Int 2012;33:326-35.
15. Hung M, Nickisch F, Beals TC, et al. New paradigm for patientreported outcomes assessment in foot & ankle research: computerized adaptive testing. Foot Ankle Int 2012;33:621-6.
16. Hung M, Franklin JD, Hon SD, et al. Time for a paradigm shift with computerized adaptive testing of general physical function outcomes measurements. Foot Ankle Int 2013;35:1-7.
17. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, et al. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Social Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1983.
18. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 1994;6:284.