TTO utility scores measure quality of life in patients with visual morbidity due to diabetic retinopathy or ARMD

Ophthalmic Epidemiology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 43-51

  Shah, Vinay A ^a   Gupta, Shailesh K ^a   Shah, Kanan V ^a   Vinjamaram, Sanjay ^a   Chalam, K V ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Age related macular degeneration; Diabetic retinopathy; Quality of life; Time trade off; Utility score; Visual loss

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; EDUCATION; EYE SURGERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORBIDITY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RETINA MACULA AGE RELATED DEGENERATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; FEMALE; FLORIDA; HUMANS; MACULAR DEGENERATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORBIDITY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TIME; VALUE OF LIFE; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 1642356679     PISSN: 09286586     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1076/opep.11.1.43.26436     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Rahmani B, Tielsch JM, Gottsch J, et al. The cause-specific prevalence of visual impairment in an urban population: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:1721-1726.
2. The Diabetic Retinopathy Research Group. Four risk factors for severe visual loss in diabetic retinopathy: the third report from the diabetic retinopathy study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1979;97:654-655.
3. Wilson MR, Coleman AL, Yu F, et al. Functional status and well-being in patients with glaucoma as measured by the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 questionaire. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:2112-2116.
4. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 30-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual frame-work and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-483.
5. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care. 1993;31:247-263.
6. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Lu JFR, Sherbourne CD, The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care. 1994;32:40-66.
7. Mangione CM, Phillips RS, Seddon JM, et al. Development of the 'Activities of Daily Vision Scale' - a measure of visual functional stutus. Med Care. 1992;30:1111-1126.
8. Steinburg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-14: an index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:630-638.
9. Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1989;5(4):559-575.
10. Hollands H, Lam M, Pater J, et al. Reliability of the time trade-off technique of utility assessment in patients with retinal disease. Can J Ophthalmol. 2001;36(4):202-209.
11. Redelmeir DA, Detsky AS. A clinician's guide to utility measurement. Primary Care. 1995;22:271-278.
12. Brown GC, Sharma S, Brown MM, Kistler J. Utility values and age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118(1):47-51.
13. Brown M, Brown G, Sharma S, et al. Utility values and diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;128:324-330.
14. Ferris FL, Kassof A, Bresnick G, Bailey I. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;94:91-96.
15. Sharma S, Brown GC, Brown MM, et al. Converting visual acuity to utilities. Can J Ophthalmol. 2000;35:267-272.