Evidence Hub

Psychometric validation of the PROMIS Fatigue-Short Form 7a in adults with newly diagnosed or recurrent Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) lung disease: the ARISE and ENCORE studies

Mange KC, Serrano D, Hassan M, Nevoret ML, Yuen DW, McManus S, Podger L, Barnes B et al.

Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025

231 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fatigue symptoms contribute to the burden of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) lung disease. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Form v1.0 – Fatigue 7a (PROMIS-F SF-7a) in adults with a new or recurrent diagnosis of MAC lung disease. METHODS: Data from the ARISE (NCT04677543) and ENCORE (NCT04677569) phase 3 trials were analyzed. Modern psychometric methods were employed to confirm the structural validity of the PROMIS-F SF-7a within this context of use. Classical methods were used to confirm the reliability and validity of the PROMIS-F SF-7a within this context of use. Internal consistency (McDonald’s omega, Cronbach’s alpha), test-retest reliability (two-way mixed effects intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC(2,1)]), and known-groups validity across Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S) Fatigue groups were estimated. Convergent validity (Pearson correlations) was assessed by correlating PROMIS-F SF-7a scores with scores on the Exacerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT), EXACT Respiratory Symptoms (E-RS), St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Scale. Meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) thresholds were determined using anchor-based methods. RESULTS: The baseline sample included 231 patients (99 ARISE, 132 ENCORE). The cross-sectional validation sample comprised 230 patients…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 231 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free