Literature DB >> 20457362

Remediating serious flaws in the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire.

Konrad Pesudovs1, Vijaya K Gothwal, Thomas Wright, Ecosse L Lamoureux.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To test the assumption that the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ) measures visual functioning, assess the validity of its subscales, and, if flawed, revise the questionnaire and derive a shortened version with sound psychometric properties.
SETTING: Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia.
METHODS: Patients from the cataract surgery waiting list self-administered and completed the 39-item NEI VFQ (NEI VFQ-39). Rasch analysis was applied, and the psychometric performance of the entire questionnaire and each subscale was tested. Instrument revision was performed in the context of Rasch analysis statistics.
RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-six patients (mean age 73.8 years) completed the questionnaire. Response categories for 2 question types were not used as intended so dysfunctional categories were combined. The NEI VFQ-39 and the 25-item version (NEI VFQ-25) had good precision but evidence of multidimensionality (more than 1 construct in 1 score), questions that did not fit the construct, suboptimum targeting of item difficulty to person ability, and dysfunctional subscales (8 NEI VFQ-39; 12 NEI VFQ-25). Questions could be reorganized into 2 constructs (a visual functioning scale and a socioemotional scale) that, after misfitting questions were removed, gave valid measurement of each construct and preserved 3 subscales. Removing redundancy from these long-form subscales yielded valid short-form scales.
CONCLUSIONS: Several NEI VFQ subscales were not psychometrically sound; as an overall measure, it is flawed by multidimensionality. This was repaired by segregation into visual functioning and socioemotional scales. Valid long and short forms of the scales could enhance application of the questionnaire. (c) 2010 ASCRS and ESCRS. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20457362     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.11.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  62 in total

1.  [Psychometric properties of the FKS : Reliability, validity, Rasch analysis, and descriptive results of the German version of the Children's Visual Function Questionnaire].

Authors:  E Farin; M Metten; M Nagl; W A Lagrèze; C Pieh-Beisse
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.059

2.  Evaluation of the Adult Strabismus-20 (AS-20) questionnaire using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  David A Leske; Sarah R Hatt; Laura Liebermann; Jonathan M Holmes
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2012-05-04       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  A new look at the WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument among visually impaired people using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Marmamula Srinivas; Gullapalli N Rao
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  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

5.  Developing an item bank to measure the coping strategies of people with hereditary retinal diseases.

Authors:  Mallika Prem Senthil; Jyoti Khadka; John De Roach; Tina Lamey; Terri McLaren; Isabella Campbell; Eva K Fenwick; Ecosse L Lamoureux; Konrad Pesudovs
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Evaluation of the Intermittent Exotropia Questionnaire using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  David A Leske; Jonathan M Holmes; B Michele Melia
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 7.389

7.  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

8.  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

9.  Risk factors for poor vision-related quality of life among cataract patients. Evaluation of baseline data.

Authors:  Irini P Chatziralli; Theodoros N Sergentanis; Vasileios G Peponis; Leonidas E Papazisis; Marilita M Moschos
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-11-14       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  Vision-related quality of life in corneal graft recipients.

Authors:  S T Mak; A C-m Wong
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 3.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.