Literature DB >> 16105674

The Refractive Status and Vision Profile: evaluation of psychometric properties and comparison of Rasch and summated Likert-scaling.

Estibaliz Garamendi1, Konrad Pesudovs, Michael J Stevens, David B Elliott.   

Abstract

The psychometric properties of the Refractive Status and Vision Profile (RSVP) questionnaire were evaluated using Rasch analysis. Ninety-one myopic patients from a refractive surgery clinic and general optometric practice completed the RSVP. Rasch analysis of the RSVP ordinal data was performed to examine for unidimensionality and item reduction. The traditional Likert-scoring system was compared with a Rasch-scored RSVP and a reduced item Rasch-scored RSVP. Rasch analysis of the original RSVP showed poor targeting of item difficulty to patient quality of life, items with a ceiling effect and underutilized response categories. Combining the underutilized response scales and removal of redundant and misfitting items improved the internal consistency and targeting of the RSVP, and the reduced 20-item Rasch scored RSVP showed greater relative precision over standard Likert scoring in discriminating between the two subject groups. A Rasch scaled quality of life questionnaire is recommended for use in refractive outcomes research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16105674     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.07.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  12 in total

1.  A qualitative investigation of visual tasks with which to assess distance-specific visual function.

Authors:  Mark J Atkinson; Steven Tally; Chris W Heichel; Igor Kozak; Jennifer Leich; Ashley Levack
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Comparison of scoring approaches for the NEI VFQ-25 in low vision.

Authors:  Bradley E Dougherty; Mark A Bullimore
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 1.973

3.  Rasch analysis of the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI).

Authors:  Bradley E Dougherty; Jason J Nichols; Kelly K Nichols
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  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

5.  Is the pediatric quality of life inventory valid for use in preschool children with refractive errors?

Authors:  Ecosse L Lamoureux; Manjula Marella; Benjamin Chang; Mohamed Dirani; Au Eong Kah-Guan; Audrey Chia; Terry L Young; Tien Y Wong; Seang Mei Saw
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.973

6.  Different impact of early and late stages irreversible eye diseases on vision-specific quality of life domains.

Authors:  Preeti Gupta; Eva K Fenwick; Ryan E K Man; Alfred T L Gan; Charumathi Sabanayagam; Debra Quek; Chaoxu Qian; Chui Ming Gemmy Cheung; Ching-Yu Cheng; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 4.996

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

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

8.  Measuring coping in parents of children with disabilities: a rasch model approach.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Seelam Bharani; Shailaja P Reddy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  An alternative application of Rasch analysis to assess data from ophthalmic patient-reported outcome instruments.

Authors:  Richard N McNeely; Salissou Moutari; Samuel Arba-Mosquera; Shwetabh Verma; Jonathan E Moore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The patient health questionnaire-9: validation among patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Deepak K Bagga; Seelam Bharani; Rebecca Sumalini; Shailaja P Reddy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.