Literature DB >> 17065481

The Impact of Vision Impairment Questionnaire: an evaluation of its measurement properties using Rasch analysis.

Ecosse L Lamoureux1, Julie F Pallant, Konrad Pesudovs, Jennifer B Hassell, Jill E Keeffe.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To explore the psychometric properties of the Impact of Vision Impairment scale (IVI) by using Rasch analysis.
METHODS: Three hundred fourteen first-time referrals to low-vision clinics completed the 32-item IVI. The data were Rasch-analyzed with a partial credit model using RUMM2020 software (RUMM Laboratory, Perth, WA, Australia). The overall fit of the model, response scale, individual item fit, differential item functioning, unidimensionality, and person-separation reliability were assessed.
RESULTS: Initially, 26 items displayed disordered thresholds. However, collapsing the response scale to three categories (4 items) and four categories (28 items) produced ordered response thresholds for all items. Four items with high proportions of missing responses, poor spread, high skewness, and deviation between observed and expected model curves were then removed. This adjustment produced overall fit to the Rasch model (item-trait interaction chi(2) = 118.3; P = 0.32). The final mean (SD) person and item fit residuals ere 0.06 (0.85) and -0.20 (1.45), respectively. The person-separation reliability was 0.9, indicating that the scale was able to discriminate between several different groups of participants. The revised scale was well targeted to the participants, with similar mean locations for items (0.00) and persons (0.16). A significant difference between participants of mild, moderate, and severe visual impairment (ANOVA; P 0.001) supported the criterion validity of the Rasch-scaled IVI.
CONCLUSIONS: The results provide support for the measurement properties of the Rasch-scaled 28-item version of the IVI and of its potential for assessing outcomes of low-vision rehabilitation. A raw score-to-Rasch person measure conversion is supplied.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17065481     DOI: 10.1167/iovs.06-0220

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  50 in total

1.  Quality of life following surgery for congenital glaucoma: findings of the LVPEI congenital glaucoma registry.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Bharani Seelam; Anil K Mandal
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 2.  Patient-reported outcomes (PRO's) in glaucoma: a systematic review.

Authors:  S Vandenbroeck; S De Geest; T Zeyen; I Stalmans; F Dobbels
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-03-18       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Optimizing measurement of vision-related quality of life: a computerized adaptive test for the impact of vision impairment questionnaire (IVI-CAT).

Authors:  Eva K Fenwick; Bao Sheng Loe; Jyoti Khadka; Ryan E K Man; Gwyn Rees; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-11-09       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Assessment of the psychometric properties of the Chinese Impact of Vision Impairment questionnaire in a population-based study: findings from the Singapore Chinese Eye Study.

Authors:  Eva K Fenwick; Peng Guan Ong; Charumathi Sabanayagam; Gwyn Rees; Jing Xie; Edith Holloway; Ching-Yu Cheng; Tien Y Wong; Blanche Lim; Pok Chien Tan; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Adding access to a video magnifier to standard vision rehabilitation: initial results on reading performance and well-being from a prospective, randomized study.

Authors:  Mary Lou Jackson; Kimberly A Schoessow; Alexandra Selivanova; Jennifer Wallis
Journal:  Digit J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-03-31

6.  Reducing respondent burden: validation of the Brief Impact of Vision Impairment questionnaire.

Authors:  Eva K Fenwick; Ryan E K Man; Gwyn Rees; Jill Keeffe; Tien Y Wong; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Harmonization of Outcomes and Vision Endpoints in Vision Restoration Trials: Recommendations from the International HOVER Taskforce.

Authors:  Lauren N Ayton; Joseph F Rizzo; Ian L Bailey; August Colenbrander; Gislin Dagnelie; Duane R Geruschat; Philip C Hessburg; Chris D McCarthy; Matthew A Petoe; Gary S Rubin; Philip R Troyk
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Age-related macular degeneration: current treatments.

Authors:  Jean Pierre Hubschman; Shantan Reddy; Steven D Schwartz
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-06-02

Review 9.  Patient-Centered Outcome Measures to Assess Functioning in Randomized Controlled Trials of Low-Vision Rehabilitation: A Review.

Authors:  Joshua R Ehrlich; George L Spaeth; Noelle E Carlozzi; Paul P Lee
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Quality of life in age-related macular degeneration: a review of available vision-specific psychometric tools.

Authors:  Robert P Finger; Monika Fleckenstein; Frank G Holz; Hendrik P N Scholl
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.