PURPOSE: The L. V. Prasad-Functional Vision Questionnaire (LVP-FVQ) was developed using Rasch analysis to assess self-reported difficulties in performing daily tasks in school children with visual impairment (VI) in India. However, the LVP-FVQ has psychometric problems of inadequate measurement precision and lack of detailed assessment of dimensionality. Furthermore, items pertaining to use of technology are lacking. The aim of this study was to present the development and validation of the second version of LVP-FVQ (LVP-FVQ II). METHODS: Development of LVP-FVQ II involved extracting items from other similar questionnaires (albeit developed for Western populations) and focus group discussions of children with VI and their parents that resulted in a 32-item pilot questionnaire. Overall, six items from the LVP-FVQ were retained. The questionnaire underwent pilot testing in 25 such children, following which a 27-item LVP-FVQ II emerged, and this was administered to 150 children with VI. Response to each item was rated on a three-category scale. Rasch analysis was used to validate the LVP-FVQ II. RESULTS: Rating scale was used by participants as was intended to. Four mobility-related items required deletion, as these did not contribute toward measurement of a single construct, indicating a secondary dimension. Deletion of the four items resulted in the 23-item unidimensional LVP-FVQ II, with good measurement precision, effective targeting of item difficulty to participant ability, and lack of notable differential item functioning. The LVP-FVQ II has high reliability, indicating that it is effectively able to discriminate between visual disability of school children in India, and is valid across age, gender, duration of VI, and location of residence. CONCLUSIONS: Given the superior measurement properties and the interval-level scores, the LVP-FVQ II appears to offer advantages over LVP-FVQ in assessment of difficulties in performing daily tasks in this population. It can be adapted for use in other developing countries.
PURPOSE: The L. V. Prasad-Functional Vision Questionnaire (LVP-FVQ) was developed using Rasch analysis to assess self-reported difficulties in performing daily tasks in school children with visual impairment (VI) in India. However, the LVP-FVQ has psychometric problems of inadequate measurement precision and lack of detailed assessment of dimensionality. Furthermore, items pertaining to use of technology are lacking. The aim of this study was to present the development and validation of the second version of LVP-FVQ (LVP-FVQ II). METHODS: Development of LVP-FVQ II involved extracting items from other similar questionnaires (albeit developed for Western populations) and focus group discussions of children with VI and their parents that resulted in a 32-item pilot questionnaire. Overall, six items from the LVP-FVQ were retained. The questionnaire underwent pilot testing in 25 such children, following which a 27-item LVP-FVQ II emerged, and this was administered to 150 children with VI. Response to each item was rated on a three-category scale. Rasch analysis was used to validate the LVP-FVQ II. RESULTS: Rating scale was used by participants as was intended to. Four mobility-related items required deletion, as these did not contribute toward measurement of a single construct, indicating a secondary dimension. Deletion of the four items resulted in the 23-item unidimensional LVP-FVQ II, with good measurement precision, effective targeting of item difficulty to participant ability, and lack of notable differential item functioning. The LVP-FVQ II has high reliability, indicating that it is effectively able to discriminate between visual disability of school children in India, and is valid across age, gender, duration of VI, and location of residence. CONCLUSIONS: Given the superior measurement properties and the interval-level scores, the LVP-FVQ II appears to offer advantages over LVP-FVQ in assessment of difficulties in performing daily tasks in this population. It can be adapted for use in other developing countries.
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
Authors: Sarah R Hatt; David A Leske; Yolanda S Castañeda; Suzanne M Wernimont; Laura Liebermann; Christina S Cheng-Patel; Eileen E Birch; Jonathan M Holmes Journal: J AAPOS Date: 2018-09-21 Impact factor: 1.220
Authors: David A Leske; Sarah R Hatt; Suzanne M Wernimont; Yolanda S Castañeda; Christina S Cheng-Patel; Laura Liebermann; Eileen E Birch; Jonathan M Holmes Journal: J AAPOS Date: 2021-02-16 Impact factor: 1.220
Authors: Ellen B M Elsman; Valerija Tadić; Carel F W Peeters; Ger H M B van Rens; Jugnoo S Rahi; Ruth M A van Nispen Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2019-12-03 Impact factor: 4.615