Dowie, Jack;
Kaltoft, Mette Kjer;
(2019)
Why a Global PROMIS® Can't Be Kept.
In: Mantas, John; Hasman, Arie; Gallos, Parisis; Kolokathi, Aikaterini; Househ, Mowafa S.; Liaskos, Joseph, (eds.)
Health Informatics Vision: From Data via Information to Knowledge.
Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
(262).
IOS Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 114-117.
ISBN 9781614999874
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI190030
Permanent Identifier
Use this Digital Object Identifier when citing or linking to this resource.
Composite multi-dimensional constructs, such as ‘global mental health’ and ‘global physical health’, in PROMIS® instruments and ICHOM standard outcome sets, are formative, not reflective. Their preference-insensitivity means they are potentially misleading in both clinical and policy decision making practice. Their frequent validation by reflective psychometric tests is also improper methodologically. The spread of these instruments is occurring without sufficient awareness on the part of patients, clinicians, researchers and policy makers that the need for group-specific preference bases (‘tariffs’) for such measures rules out any possibility of ‘international gold standard metrics’.