Literature DB >> 15895342

Visual disability variables. II: The difficulty of tasks for a sample of low-vision patients.

Robert W Massof1, Cynthia T Hsu, Frank H Baker, G David Barnett, William L Park, James T Deremeik, Carol Rainey, Cathy Epstein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To test the validity and reliability of measures of visual ability and to evaluate the relation between measurements made at the task level and measurements made at the goal level of a hierarchical model for visual disability.
DESIGN: Validation of a telephone-administered functional assessment instrument using Rasch analysis on self-assessment ratings.
SETTING: Telephone interviews of respondents in their homes. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive series of 600 outpatients with low vision.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ordinal ratings of the difficulty in performing a subset of 337 tasks. Measures of the visual ability of each patient and the required visual ability to perform each task were made using the Andrich rating scale model. Measurement validity and reliability were tested statistically by comparing response patterns and distributions to measurement model expectations.
RESULTS: Results were consistent with a single visual ability construct. Patients' visual ability estimated from task difficulty ratings agreed with estimates from goal difficulty ratings ( r =.74); the difficulty of individual goals was equal to the weighted average of the difficulties of subsidiary tasks ( r =.79). However, conclusions from the Rasch analysis were not confirmed by principal components analysis of item residuals, which indicated that visual ability had a 2-dimensional structure, with 1 factor related to mobility and the other related to reading. Factor analysis on person measures estimated from subsets of functionally grouped items confirmed the 2-dimensional structure of visual ability.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study results confirm the hierarchical structure of the Activity Breakdown Structure model and show how the individualized Activity Inventory can produce measures of limitations in functional vision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15895342     DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.09.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  23 in total

1.  Are rehabilitation services for patients in UK eye clinics adequate? A survey of eye care professionals.

Authors:  H Gillespie-Gallery; M L Conway; A Subramanian
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  An enhanced functional ability questionnaire (faVIQ) to measure the impact of rehabilitation services on the visually impaired.

Authors:  James Stuart Wolffsohn; Jonathan Jackson; Olivia Anne Hunt; Charles Cottriall; Jennifer Lindsay; Richard Gilmour; Anne Sinclair; Robert Harper
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  The Vision-Specific Optimization in Primary and Secondary Control (OPS) Scale.

Authors:  Mark Brennan-Ing; Kathrin Boerner; Amy Horowitz; Joann Reinhardt
Journal:  Eur J Ageing       Date:  2013-12-01

4.  Equating Visual Function Scales to Facilitate Reporting of Medicare Functional G-Code Severity/Complexity Modifiers for Low-Vision Patients.

Authors:  Tiffany L Chan; Monica S Perlmutter; Melva Andrews; Janet S Sunness; Judith E Goldstein; Robert W Massof
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 5.  An update on retinal prostheses.

Authors:  Lauren N Ayton; Nick Barnes; Gislin Dagnelie; Takashi Fujikado; Georges Goetz; Ralf Hornig; Bryan W Jones; Mahiul M K Muqit; Daniel L Rathbun; Katarina Stingl; James D Weiland; Matthew A Petoe
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 3.708

6.  Feasibility of the Dutch ICF Activity Inventory: a pilot study.

Authors:  Janna E Bruijning; Ruth M A van Nispen; Ger H M B van Rens
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-11-26       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 7.  Patient-centred measurement in ophthalmology--a paradigm shift.

Authors:  Konrad Pesudovs
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 2.209

Review 8.  Patient reported outcome measures for visual impairment after stroke: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lauren R Hepworth; Fiona J Rowe; Robert Harper; Kathryn Jarvis; Tracey Shipman; Helen Rodgers
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Longitudinal observation, evaluation and interpretation of coping with mental (emotional) health in low vision rehabilitation using the Dutch ICF Activity Inventory.

Authors:  Janna E Bruijning; Ger van Rens; Mark Fick; Dirk L Knol; Ruth van Nispen
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-12-24       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Calibration of the Activity Inventory Item Bank: A Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Instrument for Low Vision Rehabilitation.

Authors:  Micaela Gobeille; Chris Bradley; Judith E Goldstein; Robert Massof
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.