Evaluating psychometric properties of a clinical and a self-report blind rehabilitation outcome measure

Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 487-497

  Babcock Parziale, Judi ^a,b,c   McKnight, Patrick E ^b   Head, Daniel N ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS   (United States)

^b University of Arizona   (United States)

^c SOUTHERN ARIZONA VA HEALTH CARE SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Aged; Blind rehabilitation; Clinician ratings; Low vision; Measurement; Psychometrics; Rasch model; Rehabilitation; Self report ratings; Treatment outcomes

Indexed keywords

MEASUREMENTS; PATIENT REHABILITATION; PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; VISION;

AGED; BLIND REHABILITATION; LOW VISION; RASCH MODELS; SELF-REPORT RATINGS; TREATMENT OUTCOMES;

PSYCHROMETERS;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLINDNESS; CALIBRATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RASCH ANALYSIS; RATING SCALE; REHABILITATION CENTER; RELIABILITY; SELF REPORT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VETERAN; VISUAL DISORDER;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BLINDNESS; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT SATISFACTION; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); VETERANS; VIRGINIA; VISION, LOW;

EID: 31444444783     PISSN: 07487711     EISSN: 07487711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2004.07.0080     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Stelmack J. Quality of life of low-vision patients and outcomes of low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci. 78(5):335-42.
2. De l'Aune W, Williams M, Watson GR, Schuckers P, Ventimiglia G. Clinical application of a self-report, functional independence outcomes measure in the DVA's Blind Rehabilitation Service. J Vis Impair Blind. 2004;98(4):281-91.
3. McCabe P, Nason F, Demers Turco P, Friedman D, Seddon JM. Evaluating the effectiveness of a vision rehabilitation intervention using an objective and subjective measure of functional performance. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2000;7(4):259-70.
4. Agostinho Jn F. Subjective rating of health among the elderly. Act Adaptation Aging. 1985;6(4):53-62.
5. Babcock-Parziale J, Cunningham V. Understanding change in self-perceived functional status in veterans following low-vision rehabilitation. Invited paper presented at the American Academy of Optometry; 2003 December; Dallas, TX.
6. Sechrest L, McKnight P, McKnight K. Calibration of measures for psychotherapy outcome studies. Am Psychol. 1996;51(10):1065-71.
7. De l'Aune WR, Williams MD, Welsh RL. Outcome assessment of the rehabilitation of the visually impaired. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1999;36(4):273-93.
8. Colenbrander A. The visual system. In: Cocchiarella L, Andersson BJ, editors. Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment. 5th ed. Chicago (IL): American Medical Association; 2000. p. 277-304.
9. Massof RW. The measurement of vision disability. Optom Vis Sci. 2002;79(8):516-52.
10. Head DN, Babcock JL, Goodrich GL, Boyless JA. A geriatric assessment of functional status in vision rehabilitation. J Vis Impair Blind. 2000;94(6):357-71.
11. Massof RW. A systems model for low vision rehabilitation. I. Basic concepts. Optom Vis Sci. 1995;72(10):725-36.
12. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9(3):179-86.
13. Wilson MR. Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum; 2005. p. 172.
14. Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1976;53(11):740-45.
15. Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ. Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park (CA): Sage; 1991. p. 2-5.
16. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch model. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2001. p. 188-96.
17. Massof RW, Fletcher DC. Evaluation of the NEI visual functioning questionnaire as an interval measure of visual ability in low vision. Vision Res. 2001;41(3):397-413.
18. Stelmack J, Szlyk JP, Stelmack T, Ardickas Z, Massof RW. Sensitivity of the VA LV VFQ-48 to change after low vision rehabilitation. Presented at the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology [program 3816]; 2002; Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
19. Stelmack J, Szlyk JP, Stelmack T, Babcock-Parziale J, Demers-Turco P, Williams TR, Massof RW. Use of Rasch person-item map in exploratory data analysis: A clinical perspective. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004;41(2):233-41.
20. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen (Denmark): Danmarks Paedagogiske Institute; 1960.
21. Lord FM. Applications of Item Response Theory to practical testing problems. Educational Testing Service. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum; 1980.
22. Rogosa DR, Willett JB. Demonstrating the reliability of the difference score in the measurement of change. J Educ Meas. 1983;20(4):335-43.